The difference between orange socks and Champagne: assisting Veuve Clicquot's legal team

You couldn't make it up! 

'seeing the world through Clicquot coloured glasses'.  

Explains why Veuve Clicquot's lawyers think 

their label is the same as Ciro Picariello.

Time to get a new prescription!

Veuve Clicquot is urging a small Italian producer in Campania – Ciro Picariello – to 'evolve' (ie change) its orange label colour to avoid confusion with Veuve Clicquot's orange-yellow one. Veuve Clicquot 'continues to sustain an amicable conversation'.

   

The orange label of Ciro Picariello

The yellow orange of Veuve Clicquot

As there is no obvious similarity between either the colour or the design of the two labels it is difficult to see why the Italian producer should 'evolve' its label. As for the 'amicable conversation' it is hardly one held between equals. You have to wonder whether Ciro Picariello are being offered the renowned Sicilian alternative.

From the Drinks' Business report: 'The company added: “Veuve Clicquot conducts an active and extensive worldwide policy to enforce its trademark rights against any kind of infringement and in most cases, the issues raised are amicably settled”.'

Hardly surprising given the corporate muscle of Veuve Clicquot, part of the LVMH group, that when they allege that their trademark rights are being 'infringed' that the 'issues raised are amicably settled'! In a similar case in 2001 the Stefano Lubiana winery in Tasmania agreed to change its labels, although they were clearly a different colour to Veuve Clicquot because they just could not afford the legal costs involved – no legal action and 'issues raised amicably settled'! 

Sometimes people stand up to Veuve Clicquot: Cliquot 'a group of six women’s wear shops in Quebec and eastern Ontario' successfully resisted, with Veuve Clicquot's case being thrown out by the Federal Court of Appeal when VC appealed against an earlier court defeat.   

'The appellant claims that consumers will likely be confused to the point of thinking that the women’s clothing and the champagne originate with the same source, thereby infringing the appellant’s registered trade‑marks contrary to s. 20 of the Trade‑marks Act.'

As Jim's Loire is naturally keen to assist Veuve Clicquot's busy legal team here are some items that they might confuse with their Champagne but I can assure them that they are mistaken: 

Uni-sex, slightly sweaty gym socks

Not Champagne but could perhaps be used as a filter to add flavour  

 Amber light – a Champagne moment when the lights finally change?

Kitchen scissors – time to cut the hyper-active legal team@Veuve Clicquot?

Lewisham Library card – is this London Borough 

trying to add a bit of sparkle?

No waiting but definitely a yellow sign

Sainsbury's carrier bag – the colour might possibly 

confuse Veuve Clicquot's lawyers...

Sparkling shirt but not Champagne!   

But does feature bottles of 'Wrecked – premium lager'

Elizabeth Shaw – Dark Chocolate Orange Flutes –

obvious potential confusion with Champagne glasses 

time for 'amicable discussions to evolve name'? 

'Veuve Clicquot Yellow Label'

'Wolf Blass – Yellow Label'

Now I'm getting confused – is this Australian Veuve Clicquot?

And is that a legal eagle on the label?

Barefoot Shiraz – very similar colour – so clearly sparkling red Veuve Clicquot...

I didn't know Veuve Clicquot made Rioja!

Thank goodness the shelf talker says – 'Yellow label'!

Otherwise it would have thought it was Veuve Clicquot Orange Label...

Veuve Clicquot say this label is yellow – 'Eyes on the Yellow Label prize'

– but is almost orange

Red Champagne from central Italy?

I think I'm getting the hang of this!

Yellow label Rioja 

Potential slight confusion – producer's name starts with a C

and flying kangaroo is yellow with orange stripes 

 At least this is clear – can't be Champagne as 'no added sugar'

Phew finally on firm ground! 

Dyno – UK specialists in clearing blocked drains 

Despite their orange livery Dyno can be pretty confident that even Veuve Clicquot's zealous lawyers won't claim that Dyno, who unblock drains, might be confused with Veuve Clicquot Champagne....     

  

  

Can Veuve Clicquot affect your sight/ judgment?

 The orange label of Ciro Picariello

The yellow orange of Veuve Clicquot

Champagne giant Veuve Clicquot, part of the LVMH group, is reported to be suing Ciro Picariello, a small Italian producer in Campania over the alleged similarity of their labels. See story on Wine Searcher.

Given the striking lack of similarity between the two labels you have to wonder whether a close association with Veuve Clicquot can make you colour blind and affect your judgment? It certainly appears to have that effect on their executives!

As Diana Goodman comments in the Wine Searcher news story: 'Ciro Picariello, a family owned winery in Campania, produces just 3,500 bottles of its fiano-based Brut Contadino each year, and sports a distinctive orange label.'  

So not only is there no similarity between the two labels, Ciro Picariello poses no commercial threat to Veuve Clicquot. This is just another highly unpleasant example of pernicious corporate bullying. Unfortunately Veuve Clicquot has past form here – in early 2001 they successfully intimidated the Stefano Lubiana Winery in Tasmania using legal threats claiming that the colour of the Lubiana labels were similar to those of Veuve Clicquot – they weren't, although the difference was perhaps not quite as stark as in this new case.

Back in 2001 social media hardly existed, it will be interesting to see whether social media pressure this time can persuade Veuve Clicquot to back off realising that their ludicrous legal action damages the reputation of Veuve Clicquot Champagne. 

••

Interesting court judgment in Canada from 2006 where Veuve Clicquot failed in its attempt to stop a small chain of mid-priced women's clothes using the name Cliquot. Judges decided that shoppers sufficiently savvy to tel difference between Champagne and women's clothes.