Counterfeit at the fair?

August 11, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

I go to the State Fair for one reason: to stuff my face with all the delicious, fatty fair food. I’ve seen the booths filled with leather goods, old-fashioned signs, and clothes, but never bought anything. I usually don’t give these booths a second glance, but yesterday something caught my eye.

I noticed what appeared to be Coach purses hanging up in one of the vendor’s booths. I saw several bags that from afar had that “C” logo stitched in or had similar designs as the real things. I, as a seasoned shopper, know you can’t buy a real Coach handbag at a fair.

I didn’t stop to get a closer look, but thought if they look like a Coach bag from where I was standing, the seller must be trying to pass the bags off as the real thing or evoke the style enough that people want to buy.

I don’t know the rules and policies that dictate what vendors can sell at the fair, but I would think something sold at the State Fair should have to be legal. Counterfeit and knock-off bags are illegal and Coach is pretty fierce in protecting their trademark look. They even have a place on their website where you can report fake bags.

There are plenty of legal issues that can come up during the State Fair. Check out the next issue of Indiana Lawyer for a story on these issues.

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Not up to par
    This doesn't seem quite up to par with typical Indiana Lawyer journalism. Maybe a byline advertising a future story would have been more appropriate.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT