Marked. - Issue 010
Fresh IP developments on UGG dupes and CNN's AI copyright suit.
Issue No. 010
June 3, 2026
New York
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The IP Briefing · by ESCA Legal
|
|
|
|
| A California federal judge denied Deckers' bid to keep Quince from referencing dupes and dupe culture at an upcoming trial over shearling boot designs. The case has narrowed from broader trade dress claims to a design patent fight tied to UGG's Classic Ultra Mini boot. |
| § | Deckers owns the UGG brand and sued Quince's parent company, Last Brand, over lookalike shearling footwear. | | § | Quince argues that similar products across the market show the asserted boot design reflects common footwear conventions rather than protectable ornamentation. | | § | Deckers argues that dupe evidence could push jurors toward a popularity debate instead of the design patent comparison the law requires. | | § | The ruling clears the way for jurors to hear how copycat fashion products fit into the validity and infringement dispute. |
|
| Continue reading → |
| § ESCA Takeaway |
| This issue follows brand owners and media companies testing how existing IP rights apply when copycat culture and AI search move faster than the legal categories built to police them. |
|
|
| More IP Stories |
|
| § Copyright · Filed |
|
|
| CNN sued Perplexity in New York federal court, alleging the AI search company copied and repackaged CNN stories, videos, and images without permission while also presenting fabricated or inaccurate information as if it came from CNN. |
| § | The complaint alleges Perplexity used protected news content in AI-generated answers without a license. | | § | The complaint alleges that Perplexity attributed fabricated or inaccurate material to CNN, adding a brand-trust dimension to the copyright claims. | | § | The case joins a growing set of publisher disputes over whether AI search tools can summarize, display, or substitute for original reporting. | | § | CNN is seeking relief tied to both the copying of its content and the way Perplexity allegedly presented that content to users. |
|
|
Why it matters
AI search lawsuits are increasingly about more than copying. For media brands, the sharper issue is whether an answer engine can both replace the original article and put the publisher's name behind outputs the publisher did not create.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not subscribed? Sign up for future editions of Marked by ESCA Legal.
|
|
|
|
This newsletter is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Published by ESCA Legal. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Attorney advertising; prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
|
|