$56M IP Judgment After Seizure at The WSA Show

Jibbitz, a shoe company, recently won a $56 million default judgment for intellectual property infringement after a temporary restraining order led to the seizure of two companies' property at The WSA Show Feb. 21-24.

“We are satisfied by the court's decision, further protecting the Jibbitz brand and copyrights,” said Rich Schmelzer, president of Jibbitz. The company, a wholly owned subsidiary of shoemaker Crocs Inc., makes snap-on accessories for Crocs' shoes.

Jibbitz's case was filed in the U.S. District Court in Nevada, which found that the defendants, Jinjiang Huakai Shoes and Garments Co., Jinjiang Jiaxing Shoes and Garments Co. (both based in Jinjiang, China) and Yuanhui Chen, general manager of Jinjiang Huakai, infringed on Jibbitz's products.

The connection between Jinjiang Huakai and Jinjiang Jiaxing was not clear.

The items seized from the two companies' booths at The WSA Show included promotional materials, advertising, point-of-sale materials, signage, stationery and other materials, according to the court judgment filed April 29.

The judgment stated that Jinjiang Huakai's Web site and the seized items infringed on 179 registered copyrighted designs, 33 additional designs for which registrations are currently pending and two trademarks. Jinjiang Jiaxing's Web site and seized items infringed on 168 copyrighted designs, 14 designs with registrations pending and two trademarks.

“As an innovative company, we are determined to protect our intellectual property,” Schmelzer said. “Moving forward, we will continue to take the necessary measures to defend our intellectual property against infringers.”

Jibbitz also was awarded a $1.8 million judgement in May 2007 after an infringement ruling against Joinworld Industrial & Trading Limited, another Chinese shoe company.

For Jibbitz's recent case, the court awarded $150,000 in damages per copyright infringement and $1 million per trademark infringement, the highest allowed by law.

“Served defendants have exhibited at the same tradeshows as Jibbitz and attempted to introduce their products into the same retail outlets where Jibbitz sells its products,” according to the judgment. “The served defendants used the Jibbitz (trade)marks and consequent instances of confusion, including among sophisticated show industry professionals, have already occurred.”

Intellectual property rights have drawn attention in the tradeshow industry, especially after a high-profile raid of 55 exhibitors' booths during CeBIT, a giant information technology tradeshow held March 4-9 in Hannover, Germany.

Authorities there confiscated six cartons of electronic goods, including cell phones, navigation devices, digital picture frames, flat-screen monitors, GPS devices, high-definition televisions and documents. At least 24 of the exhibitors questioned were from China, including three from Hong Kong, according to Hannover police.

Steven Hacker, president of the Intl. Assn. of Exhibitions and Events, said cases protecting intellectual property rights are becoming more prevalent and those pursuing judgments against infringement, such as Jibbitz, don't always receive multimillion dollar decisions.

Every case is different, Hacker said.

“It's the art of negotiation,” he added. “You ask for far more than you ever hope to get and hope you get something.”