I’m a Purdue alum. I ventured to Purdue this year for homecoming to reunite with my pledge chapter (Epsilon Gamma, Sigma Gamma Rho Sorority Inc). As we relaxed in our hotel suite, sharing stories from our college days, we saw them. Out of the corner of our eyes, we saw a red lacquered sole peeking from someone’s partially open suitcase.
Ladies…we all know them when we see them. Unmistakable. Undeniable. Red Bottoms. Louboutin shoes.
Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know the source of those shoes.
Tis why I am baffled with the District Court of the Southern District of New York decision to allow Yves Saint Laurent to continue to create shoes with red bottoms when Louboutin filed suit for a TRO against Yves. Even my 10 year old daughter knows Red Bottoms = Lou.
So, I’m very glad that Lou decided to immediately appeal the decision. And I’m uber excited about the awesome brief filed by the International Trademark Association in support of Lou and telling the District Court how ridiculous its decision was. And I hope somebody punishes Yves really well for trying to infringe on Lou’s brand. Sorry, noone can convince me Yves was innocently using a red bottom on its shoes. Anyone who argues otherwise is in denial.
Here’s a link to a blog entry posted right after the District Court’s decision.
Here a link to a blog entry posted right after the INTA filed their brief.
And if you’re feeling really frisky, here’s a link to the amicus brief.
PS. If I wore a smaller size shoe, I may have “borrowed” those shoes from my sorority sister. They were hawt. =)