Tiffs sues Coscto

[BPC]

"A federal district court judge has ordered Costco to pay Tiffany more than $19 million for selling generic diamond engagement rings that were marketed using Tiffany’s name."

Full article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/business/costco-tiffany-rings.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

 

[efleon]

I was a practicing attorney for 15 years before the babies and I read that article with interest.
I think the judge applied the law correctly and judiciously.
I also happened to be in Costco today and looked closely at the diamond case.
Only one diamond stood out. A 1.73 ct VVSI, F color stone in a six prong setting. $27,000. Fine. Except it is only IGI certified which is decidedly different than GIA certified or "Tiffany" certified (which I'm still unclear about.... especially their weird verbiage about how they certify a stone only AFTER it's set so there may be variations ....wha?!).
It also lacked specs but I'm one who thinks a diamond can speak on its own and this one definitely had personality. It was winking at me despite the floursescent handicapped environment.
But I'm not one to talk about the vagaries of tiffanys certification process. I happily spent $30,000 on a 1.08 internally flawless, D color heartshaped Tiffany solitaire pendant as a mid-life gift to myself!!!!
So all in....I think the Costco diamonds are excellent if one is an informed buyer.

 

[bobochu]

I think this judgement was fair, because it's clear that Costco may have been purposely deceiving customers using the Tiffany name. I don't think that Tiffany is a generic trademark (i.e.: Kleenex, Jell-O, Band-Aid, Chapstick, etc.) and they definitely should not have been using the Tiffany name to describe their engagement ring settings. They should have used a term like "solitaire setting" instead.