Ralph Lauren, the designer behind PRL, was born Ralph Lifshitz, but perhaps Ralph Litigious fits better. Wielding the paper train behind the lawsuit-happy corpora
tion is Greenburg Taurig, a massive 1500-person firm. PRL began trademarking various designs in the 1970s and has since actively contested any loosely polo-related product.For a corporation whose success is based on conspicuously placed labels, it’s expected that a tight grip on one’s trademark would be paramount, but at times PRL appears to be just the boy that cried dilution. PRL even opposed the trademark of the United States Polo Association (USPA) – the ones that actually play the sport of polo. That’s not very sportsmanlike.
PRL has also gone after very loosely related trademarks like Ralph’s Appliances. Similarly, reader beware: if your initials are “RL” you should probably never use them. Just ask poor Rene Lazard. Likewise, if your given name is Lauren you should probably never bother starting a business. Jennifer, Dena, and Jessica Lauren will tell you this. They should probably change their names to Lifshitz just to be safe. Even “Loren” will bring the heat.
In case you thought that PRL only wanted to monopolize the sport of polo, you’re wrong. They also want rugby and water polo, and something called snow polo. Rugby Girl, Kudu Rugby, Big Toe Rugby, Rugby Lite Beer, Rugby Bitter Beer, and Rugby Premium Lager were all opposed by PRL.
Clearly the most audacious legal action is that taken against actual polo clubs. The United States Polo Association (USPA) was established in 1890, but nearly 100 years later PRL was begging the court system to deny USPA a trademark. The jury disagreed with PRL, and ruled in favor of USPA. PRL appealed the ruling, and succeeded in dragging out litigation for a few more years. In 2008, after decades in court, USPA won a federal appeal to continue use of their mark. PRL's attorneys have also challenged trademark applications of the Malibu Polo Club, the Guards Polo Club, the Greenwich Polo Club, and American Water Polo.
Regarding ThreadPit.com’s mark, PRL alleges that customers will likely be confused by ThreadPit.com’s design, but that’s clearly not true. It’s well known that all PRL customers attended an Ivy League school; it's doubtful any wearer would be so easily confused. PRL also alleges that Thread Pit’s injurious conduct will damages PRL, leaving them Black and Blue, or Purple or Chapped, depending on one’s socioeconomic status.
ThreadPit.com’s owner, Nick Moskowitz, says there is no chance of confusion. “Ralph Lauren’s products are a cheap facsimile of New England aristocracy. Our products are clearly laughing at that tradition."
Interestingly, the attorney for Horse, the oft-forgotten third-party stallion at the center of this legal battle, describes the case very differently. “This is not a trademark case at all; this is a fight for horse rights everywhere.”
Horse, reached for comment, whinnied, “thank god I finally threw that a$$h$%#.” He added, “It’s ironic that ThreadPit.com has more to do with humor than PRL actually has to do with athletics. Unfortunately, that type of logic really has no place in the legal world, as I’ve found. But hey, if the world were logical, the men would ride side saddle – no?”
