Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samsung Cancels Partnership With Counterfeit Supreme Brand (arstechnica.com)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the stranger-things dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Back in December, Samsung took the stage at one of its Chinese product launches and announced it was partnering with "Supreme," the popular skateboard fashion brand. The announcement was made with all the usual tech launch pomp and circumstance, with the CEO of "Supreme" coming on Samsung's stage to talk about the collaboration. The only problem: this was a Supreme counterfeiter called "Supreme Italia." The announcement was met with widespread ridicule online, as "Samsung the Apple copycat" had teamed up with a Supreme copycat. Samsung initially defended the deal, but after seeing the online reaction, the company started "reconsidering" its counterfeit collaboration. Now, two months after announcing the deal, Samsung is walking away.

24 comments

  1. counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    having legal right to a name is the new "counterfeit"

    1. Re:counterfeit? by saloomy · · Score: 1

      No. Having a legal right to a name only allows you to use the name. There are many protections products have which do not require the name to violate. These are design patents, trademarks, and copyrights.

      Samsung probably reached out to who they thought was the legitimate "Supreme", and negotiated a deal with the counterfeit without realizing it. Counterfeits are getting pretty good these days.

      It's ok. It happens.

    2. Re:counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ???? Supreme Italia is a completely legitimate brand operating out of Italy. It's not the "Supreme" that most people think of but they are not a counterfeiter. They are 100% legal.

      Unless people are going to say that Samsung makes "counterfeit iPhones"?

    3. Re:counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a lot of energy and motivation for Supreme fans to shout down Supreme Italia. They paid a lot of money to appear exclusive and don't want to look foolish for it.

    4. Re:counterfeit? by pr0fessor · · Score: 2

      There is no legitimate "Supreme" brand logo it was a knock off of Barbara Kruger's work.

      Either they admit that they are in the wrong or admit that Supreme Italia did no wrong.

    5. Re:counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Supreme Italia is trying very hard to confuse customers, and successfully confused Samsung. Samsung did not know they were going with a copycat brand.

      Supreme themselves may *also* have violated someone's IP, and by all means, let the lawyers settle that. But IP law, like any civilized law, does not operate on "an eye for an eye" basis.

    6. Re:counterfeit? by sjames · · Score: 1

      They must be shitting bricks by now...

    7. Re: counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In fact, I have never heard about the 'legitimate' Supreme anywhere outside of Slashdot.

    8. Re:counterfeit? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Ideas are cheap; but the right idea in the hands of the right person will net MILLIONS of dollars. The intoxicating allure of "branding".

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    9. Re:counterfeit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think it is safe to say that almost nobody had heard of either Supreme or Supreme Italia before any of this and that still very few people care.

  2. Facepalm, but an admitted facepalm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Samsung initially defended the deal, but after seeing the online reaction, the company started "reconsidering" its counterfeit collaboration." See Huawei? If you eventually come clean the morons will just forget about it.

    Try it and see.

  3. What does this mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully, this doesn't mean that Samsung will not be able to come up with explosive products any longer, right?

    1. Re:What does this mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'll partner with Gucci Ebay next, watch.

    2. Re:What does this mean? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Supreme TNT - $1500 a stick.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  4. lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whatever, none of it seems to say what the INTENT was in the 1st place. What does one have to do with the other and what the hell does a 'partnership' create?

    Just looking for the cool kids to hang out with Samsung?!?

  5. Internet Drama! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, Internet drama! Perhaps I can find a video of it all on Vimeo, the YouTube copycat.

  6. Addas by havana9 · · Score: 1

    It happened in reverse for instance for beer where the czech original http://www.budejovickybudvar.cz/en/index.html was copied in the US http://www.budweiser.com/ The end result is that in EU the USA one is sold as "Bud" Brand.
    I think the end result will be that the italian brand will change its name with "Sup".

  7. Damage control by Pimpy · · Score: 1

    The really worrying thing is that they initially attempted to defend the partnership and it took 2 whole months and excessive public ridicule for any internal decision makers to realize that a partnership with a counterfeit brand might not be a great idea.

    1. Re:Damage control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it took two months for the trademark troll, Supreme NYC to get their shills into place.

      Supreme Italia is an original brand that Supreme NYC tried to snuff out and lost the court case, the NYC & Italia monikers are the results.

    2. Re:Damage control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not an original brand, they were always a knockoff since they were founded in 2015. The Italian government originally shut them down for "parasitic competition" because of it and they had to move to Spain, and then use the EU system to expand from there. They took advantage of the original Supreme being slow to register, and also issues NYC had with the EU trademark office.

  8. Competitor not counterfeiter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [b]Supreme NYC[/b] lost their court case, so [b]Supreme Italia[/b] is regarded as a legitimate brand, with [b]Supreme NYC[/b] nothing more than a trademark troll.

    'Supreme New York actually lost a lawsuit against [b]Supreme Italia[/b] in the EU and was denied the ability to trademark its brand in the region.'

  9. Obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'd think being spelled "Supleme" would make it an obvious counterfeit.