Supreme Court: BKAVE Prohibited from Using "Mark Gonzales" Angel Design
American artist Mark Gonzales has won his final victory in a copyright lawsuit against the Korean fashion company BKAVE.
According to the legal community on August 11, the First Division of the Supreme Court (Presiding Justice Noh Taeak) upheld the lower court's partial ruling in favor of Mark Gonzales in his copyright infringement lawsuit against BKAVE.
Since 2018, BKAVE has launched a clothing brand named after Mark Gonzales and used his bird-shaped design (the Angel figure) as its main logo. BKAVE had entered into a sublicense agreement with Japan’s Sakura International, which held the license for the Mark Gonzales name and the Angel figure, allowing BKAVE to sell related products in Korea until December 2020.
The issue arose in 2021 when, even after the licensing agreement between Sakura International and Gonzales had ended, BKAVE continued to sell products under a new brand name, "What Is In," in the same manner as before. In response, Gonzales filed a lawsuit, claiming that BKAVE had infringed his copyright by continuing to use his design after the license agreement had expired.
The court of first instance ruled partially in favor of the plaintiff, stating, "BKAVE must not manufacture or sell products containing some of Gonzales's drawings and signatures, and must dispose of all such products." The appellate court upheld this first-instance ruling.
Hot Picks Today
If They Fail Next Year, Bonus Drops to 97 Million Won... A Closer Look at Samsung Electronics DS Division’s 600M vs 460M vs 160M Performance Bonuses
- Opening a Bank Account in Korea Is Too Difficult..."Over 150,000 Won in Notarization Fees Just for a Child's Account and Debit Card" [Foreigner K-Finance Status]②
- Foreign Media Take Note as Samsung Electronics Averts Strike Crisis: "Concerns Over AI Chip Supply Chain Eased"
- Room Prices Soar from 60,000 to 760,000 Won and Sudden Cancellations: "We Won't Even Buy Water in Busan" — BTS Fans Outraged
- "Who Is Visiting Japan These Days?" The Once-Crowded Tourist Spots Empty Out... What's Happening?
The Supreme Court also found no fault in the lower court's judgment and dismissed appeals from both parties. The bench stated, "There was no error in the lower court’s judgment that would have affected the outcome, such as misunderstanding the legal principles regarding creative forms of expression, failing to sufficiently examine substantial similarity, or violating the rules of logic and experience and thereby exceeding the limits of free evaluation of evidence."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.