Artist Challenges Tiffany's Trademark Blue

I'm going to start with an apology. This is another Memo about Tiffany & Co. Yes, they do seem to get more than their fair share of coverage. But they are an endlessly interesting company, rarely far from intrigue or controversy. Like the on-off-on-again buyout by LVMH, the legal tussle (now resolved) with Costco over its use of the Tiffany name, the scandal over Beyonce and the Tiffany Yellow Diamond, the "ageist" Not Your Mother's Tiffany ad campaign . . . the list goes on.

I'm a very occasional jewelry buyer but one of the last (modest) purchases I made was at Tiffany's flagship store on Fifth Avenue, New York. I say modest because we had the misfortune to confront a burglar in our home, only to find he'd swiped my wife's wedding and engagement rings, but left the Tiffany piece behind.

My own woes aside, Tiffany faces a constant a battle to protect its intellectual property. It has rarely been afraid to take on those accused of infringing its copyrights, patents, and trademarks, with US court records listing at least 28 lawsuits between 1991 and 2016. So it will be interesting to see how the latest, rather unusual, challenge plays out.

British artist and "paint provocateur" Stuart Semple has created his own version of the iconic Tiffany Blue - trademarked by Tiffany in 1998 - and is selling it online. Semple claims to be "liberating" Pantone 1837 Blue - otherwise known as as robin's-egg blue or forget-me-not blue.  It's said to be the blue that Charles Lewis Tiffany, founder of the company, chose for the cover of Blue Book, Tiffany's annual collection of exquisitely handcrafted jewels. It's become the unmistakable blue that the company uses for its jewelry boxes.

Semple, 41, who runs a not-for-profit studio, is a maverick and an innovator in the art world. He created the world's pinkest pink paint, the world's "mirroriest mirror chrome paint" and has clashed very publicly with rival artist Anish Kapoor over whose black paint was the world's blackest.

Now Semple is rattling Tiffany's cage by "liberating" its blue. In a tweet earlier this week he boasted: "Tiffany Blue! It's ILLEGAL for you to paint with it, it's trademarked in every category. That's why we had to set it free!". That appears to be his motive for creating  Tiff Blue, described as a "super flat matte high grade shade for all artists to use in their creations" which he is selling at $28 for a 150ml bottle (though it's currently sold out).

"I'm totally unsure of the legalities," he told the business magazine Fast Company. "I did speak with a lawyer who said it's a very bad idea. However, just because something is legal doesn't mean it's morally right, so it's a risk I'm willing to take."

In case you're wondering about trademarking colors, it is not uncommon. Louboutin trademarked the famous red soles of its ladies' shoes, UPS trademarked the deep brown of its parcel delivery trucks and uniforms, T-Mobile has the T-Mobile magenta, Barbie dolls have their own pink, Coca-Cola has its own red, 3M has its own yellow for Post It notes, John Deere has a tractor green, and so on and so on.

The question now is how Tiffany will respond to having its blue challenged, albeit from beyond the jewelry world. The legality of Semple's Tiff Blue is something of a gray area. Tiffany certainly has exclusive rights to using the color for packaging jewelry. How far that extends elsewhere is less clear. Tiffany may choose to ignore a stunt.  In truth it does nothing more than making the color available to artists. Period. But it may see this as the thin end of a wedge that needs defending. I've asked them the question, a few times.  I'll let you know if they get back to me.

Have a fabulous weekend.