Want More Metal? Subscribe To Our Daily Newsletter<\/h5>\n
Enter your information below to get a daily update with all of our headlines and receive The Orchard Metal newsletter.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n<\/p>\n
It all started in 2018 when fashion designer Marc Jacobs<\/strong> rolled out his Bootleg Redux Grunge collection. The collection featured a shirt that said Heaven alongside a smiley face with the letters M and J for eyes, which a large portion of music fans immediately recognized as eerily similar to that one Nirvana<\/a><\/strong> shirt everyone owns.<\/p>\n According to Loudwire<\/a><\/em>, Nirvana<\/a><\/strong> sued Marc Jacobs<\/strong> that same year, saying that the similarities were too intentional and that it was an attempt to “associate the entire ‘Bootleg Redux Grunge’ collection with Nirvana<\/a><\/strong>, one of the founders of the ‘grunge’ musical genre, so as to make the ‘grunge’ association with the collection more authentic.” It was certainly a bad look for Jacobs<\/strong> considering the line had “Grunge” in the name and the whole design reeked of Nirvana<\/a><\/strong> \u2013 not exactly a sly ripoff.<\/p>\n Jacobs<\/strong> countersued in 2019 alleging that the creator of the logo was unknown, and that Nirvana<\/a><\/strong> couldn’t claim Kurt Cobain<\/strong> made it. A portion of Jacobs<\/strong>‘ response read: “\u2026the apparent absence of any living person with first-hand knowledge of the creation of the allegedly copyrighted work in question, coupled with numerous other deficiencies in the 166 Registration that is the basis for Nirvana<\/a><\/strong>‘s infringement claim, are the basis for the counterclaim asserted.”<\/p>\n Then everything got turned upside down when the ex-art director for Nirvana’s record label, Robert Fisher<\/strong>, showed up. Fisher<\/strong> entered the lawsuit earlier in 2024, suing Nirvana<\/a><\/strong> for using his logo without ever giving him royalties. “For 30 years now, Nirvana<\/a><\/strong> has reaped enormous profits from Mr. Fisher<\/strong>‘s works through the sale of a wide range of products,” wrote Fisher<\/strong>‘s lawyers in their suit. “Assisted by a team of lawyers and managers, Nirvana was able to do so without any compensation to Mr. Fisher<\/strong> by falsely claiming authorship and ownership.”<\/p>\n Now Nirvana<\/a><\/strong>, Marc Jacobs<\/strong>, and Fisher<\/strong> have all collectively agrees to a mediator’s proposal from Magistrate Judge Steve Kim<\/strong>. A mediator’s proposal is a third party monetary proposal that all parties must consider. Zelle Law<\/a><\/em> explains it better, saying “A mediator’s proposal is generally a ‘take it or leave it’ number proposed by the mediator, typically in writing.<\/p>\n “Each party will generally be given a certain amount of time to accept or reject the proposal. Sometimes a mediator’s proposal is given at the end of the day. Other times, the mediator will extend a mediator’s proposal a day or two after mediation. The mediator’s proposal is often a number neither side likes (and the mediator plans it accordingly).”<\/p>\n No lawyers from any of the three parties have yet commented on the proposal.\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n<\/div>\n