Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsShoe Industry Suits
IN THE NEWS

Shoe Industry Suits

FEATURED ARTICLES
BUSINESS
March 2, 1991 | BRUCE HOROVITZ, TIMES STAFF WRITER
L.A. Gear's ad agency has given the sneaker maker the boot. The Los Angeles office of BBDO Worldwide on Friday said it was resigning the account primarily because of creative and strategic differences. The loss of its ad agency--which L.A. Gear named with great hoopla just three months ago--represents yet another in a series of blows the once high-flying Marina del Rey firm has suffered recently. Earlier this week rival Nike Inc. sued L.A.
ARTICLES BY DATE
BUSINESS
June 15, 1999 | Stephen Gregory
Suits and Shoes: A Manhattan Beach competitor of the trendy Dr. Martens line of shoes, boots and sandals sued the brand's parent company and U.S. distributor Monday in Los Angeles over claims that the purveyor of footwear for the self-consciously hip knowingly bills products "Made in England" that contain components fabricated in Asia. Skechers USA Inc., which filed the suit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, accused Dr. Martens' parent, London-based R. Griggs Group, and Dr.
Advertisement
BUSINESS
February 29, 1992 | From Associated Press
Nike Inc.'s Side 1 women's sports apparel division announced Friday that it had settled a $10-million trademark infringement lawsuit brought by sportswear maker Sideout Sport. The settlement with the smaller, Pasadena-based Sideout Sport ended a two-month court-imposed ban on the sale of Side 1 products. Under terms of the agreement, Side 1 will use a redesigned logo that looks less like the Sideout Sport trademark, the two companies said in a joint news statement.
BUSINESS
February 29, 1992 | From Associated Press
Nike Inc.'s Side 1 women's sports apparel division announced Friday that it had settled a $10-million trademark infringement lawsuit brought by sportswear maker Sideout Sport. The settlement with the smaller, Pasadena-based Sideout Sport ended a two-month court-imposed ban on the sale of Side 1 products. Under terms of the agreement, Side 1 will use a redesigned logo that looks less like the Sideout Sport trademark, the two companies said in a joint news statement.
BUSINESS
February 4, 1992
Nike Wins Round in Court: A federal judge has ruled that Nike Inc. did not violate a preliminary injunction when its Side 1 fitness shoes appeared in the movie "Father of the Bride." The judge ruled last week that the company's Side 1 logo, the object of a $10-million trademark infringement lawsuit, did not appear in the movie starring Steve Martin and thus did not violate the preliminary injunction won last year by a Pasadena sportswear company. Nike, based in Beaverton, Ore.
BUSINESS
December 28, 1991 | From Times Staff and Wire Reports
Nike and L.A. Gear Settle: The athletic shoe companies said they settled federal suits that they filed against each other in California and Oregon. Beaverton, Ore.-based Nike agreed to dismiss its claim that Marina del Rey-based L.A. Gear's CATAPULT shoe technology infringes on Nike patents. L.A. Gear agreed to drop a counterclaim contending that Nike engaged in anti-competitive conduct. Under the settlement, neither company will compensate the other, the firms said.
BUSINESS
January 7, 1991 | From United Press International
Athletic Shoe Firms File Suit Over Knockoffs: The makers of Reebok, Converse and Vans shoes filed separate suits against distributors that are allegedly wholesaling illegal knockoffs of the popular footwear lines. The suits maintain that McAllen, Tex.-based Ridgewood Investments, Chatex International and Cosmo Trading Corp. are selling the sport shoes in Los Angeles, among other places. Reebok International, Converse Inc. and Van Doren Rubber Co.
BUSINESS
February 4, 1992
Nike Wins Round in Court: A federal judge has ruled that Nike Inc. did not violate a preliminary injunction when its Side 1 fitness shoes appeared in the movie "Father of the Bride." The judge ruled last week that the company's Side 1 logo, the object of a $10-million trademark infringement lawsuit, did not appear in the movie starring Steve Martin and thus did not violate the preliminary injunction won last year by a Pasadena sportswear company. Nike, based in Beaverton, Ore.
BUSINESS
December 28, 1991 | From Times Staff and Wire Reports
Nike and L.A. Gear Settle: The athletic shoe companies said they settled federal suits that they filed against each other in California and Oregon. Beaverton, Ore.-based Nike agreed to dismiss its claim that Marina del Rey-based L.A. Gear's CATAPULT shoe technology infringes on Nike patents. L.A. Gear agreed to drop a counterclaim contending that Nike engaged in anti-competitive conduct. Under the settlement, neither company will compensate the other, the firms said.
BUSINESS
June 11, 1991 | From Times Staff and Wire Reports
An inventor has sued Nike Inc., claiming that the manufacturing giant swiped his air-cushion sole invention when it marketed the Air Jordan sneaker. Charles Petrosky, 73, of Arlington, Va., filed suit in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, seeking royalties and penalties from Nike. Petrosky's lawyer said his client patented an air-cushion sole in 1978 and tried to sell the idea to Nike long before it first marketed the Air Jordan in the 1980s.
BUSINESS
March 2, 1991 | BRUCE HOROVITZ, TIMES STAFF WRITER
L.A. Gear's ad agency has given the sneaker maker the boot. The Los Angeles office of BBDO Worldwide on Friday said it was resigning the account primarily because of creative and strategic differences. The loss of its ad agency--which L.A. Gear named with great hoopla just three months ago--represents yet another in a series of blows the once high-flying Marina del Rey firm has suffered recently. Earlier this week rival Nike Inc. sued L.A.
BUSINESS
June 11, 1991 | From Times Staff and Wire Reports
An inventor has sued Nike Inc., claiming that the manufacturing giant swiped his air-cushion sole invention when it marketed the Air Jordan sneaker. Charles Petrosky, 73, of Arlington, Va., filed suit in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, seeking royalties and penalties from Nike. Petrosky's lawyer said his client patented an air-cushion sole in 1978 and tried to sell the idea to Nike long before it first marketed the Air Jordan in the 1980s.
BUSINESS
June 15, 1999 | Stephen Gregory
Suits and Shoes: A Manhattan Beach competitor of the trendy Dr. Martens line of shoes, boots and sandals sued the brand's parent company and U.S. distributor Monday in Los Angeles over claims that the purveyor of footwear for the self-consciously hip knowingly bills products "Made in England" that contain components fabricated in Asia. Skechers USA Inc., which filed the suit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, accused Dr. Martens' parent, London-based R. Griggs Group, and Dr.
BUSINESS
January 7, 1991 | From United Press International
Athletic Shoe Firms File Suit Over Knockoffs: The makers of Reebok, Converse and Vans shoes filed separate suits against distributors that are allegedly wholesaling illegal knockoffs of the popular footwear lines. The suits maintain that McAllen, Tex.-based Ridgewood Investments, Chatex International and Cosmo Trading Corp. are selling the sport shoes in Los Angeles, among other places. Reebok International, Converse Inc. and Van Doren Rubber Co.
Los Angeles Times Articles
|