Similar logos of two American brands depicting polo players often confuse buyers – and they are even perceived as different lines of the same brand, although in reality they are united only by a long history of litigation. But let's look at everything in turn.
History of the Polo Ralph Lauren brand
The son of immigrants, Ralph Lauren (born Ralph Livshits) began his journey to the top of the fashion Olympus. It all began in 1966, when the young clothing salesman convinced his employer, the Beau Brummel company, to let him launch his own line of ties. These ties quickly found their audience, and the young designer earned a reputation.
In 1967, he received a $50,000 investment from clothing manufacturer Norman Hilton to open his own branded store. Ralph chose a lone polo player as his trademark and logo, although he had no connection to the sport. Polo was traditionally considered the “sport of kings” due to the need to maintain vast fields and stables for the game, and Ralph chose it as a synonym for luxury, wealth and exclusivity. In 1971, a branded store was opened in Beverly Hills and a women's clothing line was launched, and in 1972, the classic basic polo shirt with a small logo on the chest in 24 colors was introduced.
However, the designer's ambitions and desire for rapid growth caused problems within the company, and it was only saved from bankruptcy by the appearance of a new investor, Peter Strom, who also became the company's president. He created a new marketing strategy for the brand, the purpose of which was to create the feeling that Ralph Lauren had always been a part of America. So, in 1974, Ralph Lauren designed some of the costumes for the main character of the film “The Great Gatsby”. The film later received an Oscar for best costume design, which was awarded to the main artist Theona W. Aldridge. And in 1978, a Western wear collection appeared, inspired by country style and images of the Wild West. At the same time, the first perfume was released.
By 1997, Polo Ralph Lauren's sales reached a billion dollars, and the company went public.
History of the U.S. Polo Assn.
Formally, the brand can be considered one of the oldest players in the clothing market – along with Levi's and Brooks Brothers – the United States Polo Association (USPA) was founded back in the 19th century, in 1890. However, the company introduced everyday collections aimed at a wide range of buyers only in 1981. Until then, the Association was exclusively concerned with sports: it organized tournaments, regulated the rules of the game in the USA and Canada, and produced equipment for professional horse polo players.
The brand's logo depicts two horsemen. The brand maintains its connection with the professional community – star players are featured in the company's lookbooks, and charity matches and tournaments are held under its auspices.
In 1997, when Ralph Lauren went public, US Polo Assn. entered the European market — since then, their collections have been sewn in Turkey.
What is the difference between brands?
The Ralph Lauren brand belongs to the premium segment – and if buying things under the “traditional” Polo Ralph Lauren brand can still be justified somehow (the things are really stylish and modern), then for the price of things from the Purple Label line you can buy a good used car.
US Polo Assn. is a relatively affordable brand with a “right” price-quality ratio. When asked whether the company prioritizes sports identity or “fashion statements,” company president David Cummings said, “Before polo was a fashion statement, it was a sport.”
History of lawsuits
The companies met in court in 1984, just 3 years after the release of the first US Polo Assn collection. Then Polo Ralph Lauren managed to prove that in the clothing market the polo player is associated with their brand, but the wording of the court decision was so vague (“The logo with the players can be present on USPA products only if the products of the two brands are not so similar that they can be confused”) that in essence the decision did not affect the activities of the USPA in any way – except that the inscription “NOT AFFILIATED WITH POLO RALPH LAUREN CORP” (“Not affiliated with Polo Ralph Lauren Corp”) appeared on the removable labels and shoe boxes.
Fifteen years later, in 1999, the US Polo Assn. decided to publish its own sports magazine to promote its products — and received another lawsuit from Loren: he did not like the name “POLO.” The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff.
In 2006, a new lawsuit from Ralph Lauren forced the US Polo Assn. to use the logo only with the letters USPA at the bottom. However, after a series of appeals in 2008, this restriction was lifted, given the brand's historical heritage and its direct connection to the game of polo.
In 2010, Ralph Lauren became the defendant, a sports organization that tried to prove that it monopolized the use of the word “Polo.” The lawsuit was dismissed, with the judge pointing out that the plaintiff himself uses the word in his trade name.
Around the same time, the USPA lost a lawsuit against Ralph Lauren and was given an indefinite ban on the production of perfumes. Despite the fact that the association pointed to a previously issued permission to use the trademark on clothing items, the court ruled that the previous decisions only applied to the clothing segment: perfume products with such a logo, in its opinion, infringed on Polo Ralph Lauren's rights and were likely to mislead consumers.
In 2014, the companies met again in court, this time with sunglasses sales as the stumbling block. In the trial court, Polo Ralph Lauren managed to prove that the association should be held liable for violating the previous injunction. However, the appeals court sided with the US Polo Assn. and pointed out the vague provisions of the previous courts, thereby allowing the use of the trademark for any other products, except cosmetics.
