Louboutin claims New York retailer infringed red sole trade mark

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Louboutin claims New York retailer infringed red sole trade mark

Shoemaker Christian Louboutin is once again suing for trade mark infringement over his red-soled shoe, less than nine months after his infamous suit against Yves Saint Laurent was decided

On Friday, the French designer filed a complaint with the District Court for the Southern District of New York against Alba Footwear and unidentified customers of the US retailer.

The complaint included sample photographs of two pairs of Alba shoes that, while clearly bearing the Alba logo, utilised red soles and contrasting uppers.

Louboutin made headlines after suing fashion rival YSL for infringing the red sole mark with a monochromatic red shoe. YSL counterclaimed that the mark should be invalidated, and in August 2011 District Court Judge Victor Marrero agreed, concluding that “a monopoly on the color red would impermissibly hinder competition among other participants”.

But in September last year, a panel of judges from the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned the decision. The appellate court resurrected the red sole mark, but limited it to shoes featuring red soles and contrasting uppers and ruled that YSL’s all-red shoe did not infringe.

The ruling was welcomed by brand owners and industry organisations including Tiffany and INTA, both of which filed amicus briefs in support of Louboutin.

In Louboutin’s latest lawsuit, the designer claims Alba imports and sells copies of the Louboutin shoes. According to the complaint, authentic Louboutin shoes sell for up to $6400 a pair.

Louboutin is suing for trade mark infringement, counterfeiting, trade mark dilution, unfair competition and false designation of origin under the Lanham Act and New York State law.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Tilleke & Gibbins topped the leaderboard with four awards across the region, while Anand & Anand and Kim & Chang emerged as outstanding domestic firms
News of a new addition to Via LA’s Qi wireless charging patent pool, and potential fee increases at the UKIPO were also among the top talking points
Gift this article