You be the fashion lawyer: Did Abercrombie make the right choice by offering The Situation a NON-endorsement contract?

Posted by Charles Colman

Abercrombie & Fitch has offered a "substantial payment" to Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino, of Jersey Shore fame infamy, to STOP wearing the brand's clothes.  As the company explained, "this association is contrary to the aspirational nature of our brand, and may be distressing to many of our fans."

 

While the attorney behind LAW OF FASHION has never heard of a trademark tarnishment claim based solely on an unsavory individual's patronage of a certain label (which is not to say such cases haven't been brought), there are obvious trademark issues associated with the term "Fitchuation," which has been bandied about.

 

Still, Abercrombie has (wisely) decided to go the contract route, at least at first... assuming the offer is, in fact, anything more than a publicity stunt.  If the offer was made in earnest, A&F should keep in mind that Sitch does not have a great track record when it comes to honoring contracts, as recounted in my August 6th CATWALK JUSTICE column for Styleite.com.

 

So, you be the fashion lawyer: did A&F approach this "situation" the right way?  Is this all just a publicity stunt for Abercrombie?  Share your thoughts, scorn, and/or laudations here.


[This post is for entertainment and informational purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship among any individuals or entities.  Any views expressed herein are those of the writer on the particular date of this post, and should not necessarily be attributed to his law firm or its clients.]