C[omp]ute

From: andrew cooke <andrew@...>

Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:56:13 -0300

From the doc linked below:

"Interestingly, while North Face introduces its Complaint herein by
referencing its founders, the present owner of the North Face brand,
VF Corporation (formerly known as Vanity Fair Corporation, not to be
confused with the Conde Naste publication of the same name), also is
understood to own Jansport, Eastpak, Napajiri and Kipling (among
others), generally but eroneously perceived by the marketplace as
independent competitors of North Face.  The original North face
founders are understood to have stopped exploring the very brand they
created.

...

Plaintiff's (NF) products are marketed as products that are to be used
in furtherance of an adventurous lifestyle full of exploring,
climbing, hiking, skiiing and other outdoor activities.

Plaintiff's (NF) products are generally perceived and actively
marketed to be expensive items for the "exploring" consumer.

Despite paragraph 3 and because of paragraph 4, Plaintiff's products
are perceived as being largely consumed by those who have little to no
interest in living an adventurous lifestyle, but, rather, are
interested in acquiring Plaintiff's products for the status and/or
notoriety they receive from being seen in Plaintiff's expensive
apparel and accesories.

Defendants recognise this bizarre phenomenon.

Defendants, utilizing parody, are making a bona fide social commentary
on the pervasive banality, frivolity, absurdity and comedic nature of
the consumer culture and those who participate therein.


Absolutely.  :o)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24837101/South-Butt-answer-to-North-Face-complaint
http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/files/southbuttreply.pdf

Andrew