The US Solicitor General has urged the Supreme Court to deny the Swiss luxury brand Vetements request to trademark its name.

 Earlier this year, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office refused to register the company’s trademarks, stating that the word ‘Vetements’ – the French word for clothing – is too generic to protect. The Federal Circuit Court subsequently affirmed this decision.

Vetements are now petitioning SCOTUS to review the decision, arguing that trademark authorities and courts across the US are treating words in foreign languages differently from those in English, and that they were inconsistent in how they handled translations.

It is a basic premise of U.S. law that trademarks should be viewed through the lens of consumer perception. Vetements maintain that the word would not be widely understood or translated by American consumers or trademark examiners. The case poses some unique questions for courts. As social media culture becomes omnipresent in fashion, and trademarks travel across multiple jurisdictions, these legal challenges are becoming more commonplace. The question arises as to whether words should be systematically translated into English to prevent the registration of generic terms? Should the ordinary American consumer be viewed as one who thinks solely in English?

The Solicitor General, John Sauer, argues in his opposition brief that to allow the registration of ‘Vetements’ for clothing and clothing stores would be inconsistent with the fundamental purpose of a trademark, which is ‘to indicate the source of the goods’ and avoid consumer confusion.’

More to come on this one.