The judge said that Louis Vuitton make a joke about "Hangover" case

  Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. focused on getting a few laughs in a scene in The Hangover: Part II, when one of the characters named after its designer luggage Bungle. But the scene does not enjoy luxury manufacturer Louis Vuitton SA, which hit the studio with a lawsuit for trademark infringement. Fortunately for Warner Bros., the judge was monitoring the case of the joke.

Louis Vuitton has sued Warner Bros. in December, arguing that the appearance of fraudulent travel LV bag in the film on its brands and customers do not confuse injured. On Friday, U.S. District Judge Andrew threw Carter Jr. of Manhattan from the suit, the site of the lawyers at Jenner & Block studio and finding that the use of the bags in the film is not commercial speech, the first ruggedized change. Andrew Jenner, Bart told us that the decision "correctly corresponds to the current state of trademark law" to protect the rights of the first amendment to Warner Brothers, which was "the overriding interest in the litigation."

Appropriately for the reader, The Hangover II, Judge Carter, the movie, nicknamed "bachelor party-gone-comedy wrong." The suite had reported some 580 million worldwide at the time of the complaint, making it the most successful R-rated comedy of all time and one of the top box-office draws of 2011. Louis Vuitton complaint arose from the early scene in the movie where a main character, Alan, played by Zach. Galifianakis, is seen sitting next to a fake Louis Vuitton bag travel if another player moves his pocket, the character Galifianakis responds by saying, "Be careful ... is Lewis is a Vuitton."

In the lengthy court dissection of a joke we have ever seen, Carter J. heavily on the importance of the mispronunciation of "Lewis Vuitton" the formation of character and action of removing kneaded. "Alan laconic reference to ..." [His] [c] areful "because her Vuitton bag is a Lewis appears to be a snob, just because the public does Louis Vuitton - in which the bag [the injury] seems to be confusing, with the luxury and lifestyle of high society, "wrote Judge Carter. Carter concluded that "it is ironic, because he can not correctly pronounce the brand name of one of his expensive goods, in addition to the image of Alan comical character as socially awkward and ill-informed." Both funny and

Bart Jenner confessed to us that the scene "packs a little more pressure when it comes comedy in the film."

We went to Theodore Max Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, Louis Vuitton, which represented as a local agency in litigation with the lead counsel to Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg. Max sent our request for comment to a spokesman for the company that is passed along the following statement by e-mail: "We are deeply from the decision of the Court We remain disappointed for the protection of our brand, and is in our vigilant efforts to prevent abuse and misleading. our brand for the benefit of our customers. "

Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg had better luck in the prosecution of trademark applications of the company against another accused infringer, Hyundai. As we reported in April Manhattan U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel on summary judgment granted in two points from Louis Vuitton Trademark Dilution against the automaker. Hyundai had a second preview of a basketball-brown leather with a pattern that the Louis Vuitton Monogram collected in this ad on TV, which aired in 2010 during the Super Bowl after the game and much more included later in the Academy Awards.

Bart Jenner said on Monday that the biggest difference between the case and the case of Hyundai Hangover, that the automaker's announcement of the commercial was open, while the scenes of the film amounts to non-commercial speech creatively. Louis Vuitton has been criticized in recent months over its enforcement efforts on trademarks. The company uses a formal notice in February at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, an imitation of the style monogram Louis used V. 'S in a poster promoting a seminar in March on the right track.

Like all brands, says Beard, Louis Vuitton has to fight the "delicate balance" between in order to protect their brands and found to be aggressive. "It's a challenge to a lawyer in order to find the right balance," says Bart. "In both UPenn and the situation in our situation, they were on the line on this, and I think the case is an appeal by Hyundai a lot closer."