About a Trademark – Nirvana Sues Marc Jacobs for Trademark Infringement
As reported by Dazed Digital, at the end of 2018, 90’s rock band Nirvana filed a lawsuit against designer Marc Jacobs in California Federal Court. The band alleged copyright and trademark infringement in regards to the designer’s use of Nirvana’s iconic smiley face logo in his recent clothing line.
Jacobs, once hailed as the “guru of grunge”, incorporated a smiley face similar to that used by Nirvana into his perhaps ironically named “Bootleg Redux Grunge” SS93 collection. The collection is an ode to one originally launched while working for Perry Ellis in 1993 and includes new socks, shirts and sweaters bearing a smiley face with “M” and “J” in place of “Xs” for eyes, and “HEAVEN” written across the top in place of “NIRVANA”. The colours and font used by Jacobs’ are the same as those used in Nirvana’s logo. While certain brands, such as Target and Urban Outfitters, have authorization to use the mark, Jacobs allegedly did not receive such authorization.
The original smiley face was said to have been drawn by Kurt Cobain as part of the promotional materials for the band’s album, Nevermind. However, despite obtaining copyright registration, Nirvana never registered the mark with the US Patent and Trademark Office. Instead, at paragraph 33 of its complaint, Nirvana states that it “enjoys common law trademark rights…which rights are superior to any rights that Defendants may claim in and to that trademark…”.
Nirvana LLC — the legal entity formed in September 1997 by Dave Grohl, Krist Novoselic and the Courtney Love-controlled Cobain estate — is seeking monetary damages as well as injunctive relief against Jacobs, whose legal team has recently filed for a dismissal of the suit. At the time of writing, Nirvana had not yet responded to this filing for dismissal.
Photo Credit: https://unsplash.com/@fng137
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Kansas City Chiefs Stars Sued for Trademark Infringement Over Steakhouse
The sneaker company, 1587 Sneakers, is reportedly suing Kansas City Chiefs players, Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce, along with their restaurant partners, for trademark infringement.1587 Sneakers… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence…