Connection lost
Server error
CHRISTIAN LOUBOUTIN v. YVES SAINT LAURENT AMERICA Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Louboutin sued YSL for trademark infringement over its red-soled shoes. The court held Louboutin’s red sole mark is valid, but only when the red sole contrasts with the shoe’s upper. Thus, YSL’s monochrome all-red shoe did not infringe.
Legal Significance: This case affirmed that a single color can be a trademark in the fashion industry, rejecting a per se rule of aesthetic functionality. It also established that protection for such a mark is limited to the specific use that has acquired secondary meaning.
CHRISTIAN LOUBOUTIN v. YVES SAINT LAURENT AMERICA Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Christian Louboutin has used a lacquered, bright red outsole on his high-fashion women’s footwear since 1992. The red sole typically contrasts with the color of the shoe’s upper. In 2008, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) granted Louboutin a trademark registration for this feature, described as a “lacquered red sole on footwear.” In 2011, Yves Saint Laurent (YSL), another luxury fashion house, began marketing a line of monochrome shoes, including an all-red shoe where the upper, heel, and outsole were the same shade of red. Louboutin filed suit for trademark infringement and sought a preliminary injunction to prevent YSL from selling its all-red shoe. The district court denied the injunction, holding that a single color could never serve as a trademark in the fashion industry because it is always aesthetically functional. Louboutin appealed the denial of the preliminary injunction.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Can a single color used on a fashion item, specifically a red lacquered shoe outsole, acquire secondary meaning and function as a protectable trademark under the Lanham Act?
Yes. The court held that Louboutin’s red sole mark is a valid Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit an
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Can a single color used on a fashion item, specifically a red lacquered shoe outsole, acquire secondary meaning and function as a protectable trademark under the Lanham Act?
Conclusion
This case solidifies the principle that color can be a valid trademark Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitatio
Legal Rule
A single color can serve as a protectable trademark if it has Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui offic
Legal Analysis
The Second Circuit began by rejecting the district court's per se rule Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor inc
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A single color can serve as a trademark in the fashion