Good Clean Love Inc. is suing Gwyneth Paltrow's company, which specializes in feminine and hygiene products, for selling products using confusingly similar trademarks and creating the potential for reverse confusion. .
GCL stated the reason for filing the lawsuit: “It is a tragic situation in which young trademark users with considerable economic power overtake the trademarks of smaller, more advanced users and saturate the market with trademarks that threaten to destroy the reputations and goodwill of more advanced users.'' “This is to prevent such a situation.”
GCL was created by Goop Inc., founded in 2008, to intentionally create “Good. Clean.” We have used the “Goop” mark in connection with our health products. Goop's allegedly infringing products also include “The Pleasure Seeker Daily Chews,” according to the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon.
Founded in 2003, GCL says it has spent more than 20 years building its brand as a trusted provider of women's sexual and hygiene products. GCL says it uses its patented Bio-Match technology in product development and has used its mark on those products for more than 10 years.
GCL alleges that Goop sells multiple products using the word “Good.” clean. The “Goop” mark contains known harsh chemicals. GCL claims that Goop's alleged trademark infringement could mislead consumers into believing that GCL's products also contain harmful substances.
GCL also argues that consumers are more likely to believe that Goop's products are clean, even if they are not. By contrast, GCL argues in its complaint that its mark must “demonstrate that the product is truly clean.”
GCL says it cannot compete with Goop's saturated market and argues that the alleged infringement threatens its ability to expand into other product lines. The GCL also states that Goop's allegedly infringing marks are confusingly similar in sound, appearance, and overall commercial impression, as the two key terms are the same.
“The use of the GOOP house mark does not negate the similarity between the marks, but it exacerbates it, because the use of Goop does not negate the similarity between the marks, as Goop's use does not negate the similarities between the marks, as Goop's use of the mark does not negate the similarity between the marks. “This is because it may cause confusion by causing people to believe that they are the source,'' the complaint states.
According to the complaint, Goop uses terms such as “naked” that are similar to the GCL-owned trademark registration for “Almost Naked.” GCL also argues that Goop's actions could cause confusion for consumers as products from major retailers, including Amazon and Target, “directly collide” with the top of online search results.
GCL said Goop is aware of the infringement claims because Goop previously requested samples of GCL's lubricant products that it may sell through Goop's online marketplace.
GCL also sent a cease-and-desist letter to Goop regarding the “confusingly similar” marks, and the next day, Goop issued a “Good. Clean. 'Goop' mark,” the complaint says.
The complaint alleges five claims, including federal claims for trademark infringement, false advertising, unfair competition, and similar claims under Oregon law.
GCL is seeking a preliminary and permanent injunction barring the alleged infringement, a court order requiring Goop to “expressly abandon” its “Good.” trademark application. clean. Goop's damages, attorney's fees, and costs.
Goop did not respond to a request for comment.
Mr. Cozen O'Connor is the representative of GCL.
