The alpha:
- It’s a big day for legal precedents on Web3, as the lawsuit between luxury brand Hermès International SA and Mason Rothschild, the artist behind the controversial MetaBirkin NFT project, It has been resolved.
- After six days of proceedings in a Manhattan court, the ruling was issued that the Rothschild’s sale of bag-inspired NFTs violated Hermès’ rights to the “Birkin” trademark.
- A nine-person jury returned a verdict on Wednesday, February 8, awarding Hermès $133,000 in total damages and finding that Rothschild’s NFTs are not protected by the First Amendment.
- With regulation around cryptocurrencies and NFTs still largely unsettled, this case will likely set the tone for future proceedings to be considered intellectual property law matters.
Dive deeper:
On January 14, 2022, Hermès International sued Rothschild for trademark infringement following the release of MetaBirkins— a collection of 100 faux fur-covered NFT bags that closely resembled (in name and image) the French fashion house’s famous Birkin bags.
in its original 47 page complaint, Hermès argued that Rothschild’s MetaBirkins NFT collection “is likely to cause confusion and error in the public mind.” Furthermore, Hermès claimed that Rothschild has also visibly profited from the unauthorized use of the trademark through the sale and resale of the NFTs. Meanwhile, Rothschild argued that he should be allowed to “create art based on [his] interpretations of the world around us [him]”, citing “fair use” and making specific reference to Andy Warhol campbell’s soup cans series.
In the end, the jury sided with Hermès. They determined that Rothschild had in fact infringed the trademark and that NFTs should be considered similar to consumer products and subject to trademark laws that often help protect influential clothing brands from imitations and the sale of merchandise. imitation.
Whats Next
For years, the creators of NFTs have operated under the assumption that the decentralized nature of the blockchain, coupled with First Amendment protections, would be enough to keep most out of hot water. However, with this latest ruling, the court apparently indirectly warned creators that copyright law should be considered applicable on the blockchain. After less than a month of proceedings, the trial made an important statement about how NFTs exist at the intersection of copyright law and constitutional law.
Considering the wide range of spin-off and copycat NFT collections that are often released in response to notable brands (such as Porsche) entering the space, the creators of Web3 will need to think twice before venturing into what could be considered unconventional territory. potential trademark infringement.
But wait! There is more:
This story was breaking and has been updated.
