Remember the ‘MetaBirkins’? We’re talking about those furry NFT versions of the Birkin by artist Mason Rothschild selling for thousands. Well, even if you forgot, Hermès didn’t. It sued the artist claiming these ‘bags’ violate Hermès’ trademark rights, calling Rothschild a “digital speculator” using the bags as a “get rich quick” scheme, and ripping off the branded Birkin name.
Rothschild moved to dismiss the amended complaint, essentially arguing that it is art and protected by the First Amendment. He further contends that his art is a comment on the “cruelty inherent” in the production of its expensive leather bags.
Image Credit: Marketing-Interactive.com
Well, round one in this case went to Hermès. Earlier this month, the federal district judge refused to dismiss the case and it will now go forward. That means Rothschild will need to answer the complaint and the parties will engage in discovery – the exchange of documents and testimony. In the meantime we await the judge’s longer opinion and explanation of the ground for denying Rothschild’s motion to dismiss, as the decision was a short order, with an opinion to follow.
But we ask you again – in a purely nonlegal capacity – do you think the MetaBirkin name creates confusion that these NFTs are related to the Hermès Birkin?
Let us know.
Read: Not Too Pleased With NFT: Hermès Upset With Virtual Birkin Creator
- Maura Carlin posted 2 years ago
- last edited 2 years ago
