Louis Vuitton loses fight against more than bag-in 'Hangover II'

  MANHATTAN (CN) - Louis Vuitton can not sue Warner Bros. for allegedly using a fake handbag in a brief scene in "The Hangover: Part II", a federal judge ruled.
     Played in the comedy, 2011, the character of Zach Galifianakis Alan door seven sports bags from Louis Vuitton "Monogram Canvas", which consists of intertwined initials of the company.
     At one point in the film, Galifianakis cries when his luggage is sitting a character named Teddy can be moved. Alan "Attention! A Vuitton Lewis, is" crying, pronounced the name wrong brand.
     U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter Jr. dismissed the case on Friday.
     "It is instructive to consider what this business is and what it is not," reads the order of 21 pages. "Louis Vuitton did not believe to the Warner Bros' unauthorized use of trademarks or LVM information on the name of Louis Vuitton in the film. Louis Vuitton is not claiming that Warner Bros. misled the public that has been sponsored or Louis Vuitton connected with the film. Instead, Louis Vuitton claimed that Warner Bros.. impermissible use of third-party bag that allegedly infringed trademarks LVM. "
     In April, Warner Bros. claimed that the process could enjoy freedom of expression, citing a 1989 lawsuit by Hollywood icons Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire filed.
     Judge Carter also referred to his decision in this case.
     "In Rogers v. Grimaldi, the second circuit held that the Lanham Act does not apply" art "as the defendant's use of the mark (1)" artistically relevant "for the work and (2) does not" explicitly misleading as to the latest source or content of the work: ". 'order books states" Louis Vuitton does not dispute that Warner Bros. is not controversial use of the mark commercially, placing them firmly within the jurisdiction of a "work of art" under Rogers. "
     Carter added that reference Vuitton was necessary for the film.
     "Laconian Note Alan Teddy '[his] [c] areful" because their Vuitton bag is a Lewis appears to be a snob just because the public does, Louis Vuitton - in which the bag Diophy seems confusing - with a luxury and a high society lifestyle, "says the order." His comment is so funny because he's French incorrectly pronounce "Louis" as the English "Lewis," and ironically, because he can speak really expensive brand name of one of their properties , additional information to the image of Alan wrong as socially inept character and comic way. This scene also introduces the comic tension between Alan and Teddy, who appears throughout the film. "
     Judge Louis Vuitton aside "expanded vision" of its brand.
     "Here there is no likelihood that viewers believe that the bag is a real Diophy Louis Vuitton bag is not because a fictional character that statement made in the context of a fiction film," says the order. "There is a risk of confusion that this statement would lead viewers to believe that Louis Vuitton has the use of Warner Bros. Diophy approved budget. In a case like this, no amount of discovery tilts the balance in favor of the proprietor at the expense of the public's right to freedom of expression. "