Jo Malone Sued by Estée Lauder for £200,000 Over Zara Fragrance Collaboration
British perfumer Jo Malone has expressed shock and sadness after being sued by Estée Lauder Companies for over £200,000 in damages. The lawsuit alleges that Malone breached a long-standing naming agreement by using her name on fragrances created for the fashion retailer Zara. Estée Lauder, which acquired Malone’s original brand in 1999, claims this usage infringes on trademarks and undermines the brand equity of Jo Malone London. Although a non-compete clause expired in 2011, allowing Malone to launch her new brand, Jo Loves, the corporation argues her recent collaboration violates contractual obligations regarding the use of her name. In response, Malone defended her actions via Instagram, stating she sold a company, not her identity, and emphasized that she is the individual creator approached by Zara. She highlighted efforts to distinguish her current work from the former brand, including specific labeling on packaging. This legal dispute highlights the complex intellectual property rights remaining after high-profile brand acquisitions and the personal versus commercial identity of founders in the luxury goods sector.
Wire timeline
Jo Malone Sued by Estée Lauder for £200,000 Over Zara Fragrance Collaboration
British perfumer Jo Malone has expressed shock and sadness after being sued by Estée Lauder Companies for over £200,000 in damages. The lawsuit alleges that Malone breached a long-standing naming agreement by using her name on fragrances created for the fashion retailer Zara. Estée Lauder, which acquired Malone’s original brand in 1999, claims this usage infringes on trademarks and undermines the brand equity of Jo Malone London. Although a non-compete clause expired in 2011, allowing Malone to launch her new brand, Jo Loves, the corporation argues her recent collaboration violates contractual obligations regarding the use of her name. In response, Malone defended her actions via Instagram, stating she sold a company, not her identity, and emphasized that she is the individual creator approached by Zara. She highlighted efforts to distinguish her current work from the former brand, including specific labeling on packaging. This legal dispute highlights the complex intellectual property rights remaining after high-profile brand acquisitions and the personal versus commercial identity of founders in the luxury goods sector.
The Guardian