Good Clean Love Inc. is suing Gwyneth Paltrow’s company specializing in feminine hygiene and health products for allegedly selling products using a confusingly similar mark and creating a likelihood of reverse confusion.
GCL says it filed the lawsuit “to prevent the disastrous situation in which a junior user of a brand, with significant economic power, saturates the market with a brand that threatens to overtake a smaller senior user’s brand and usurp the reputation and goodwill of the senior user”.
GCL alleges that Goop Inc, launched in 2008, is intentionally using the term “Good.” Clean. Goop” in relation to several sexual health products to benefit from GCL’s already established “Good Clean Love” brand for similar products. According to the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, the allegedly counterfeit Goop products include “The Pleasure Seeker Daily Chews.”
Founded in 2003, GCL says it has spent over 20 years building its brand as a trusted supplier of sexual and feminine hygiene products. GCL says it uses patented Bio-Match technology to develop its products and has used its trademarks for those products for more than ten years.
GCL claims that Goop sells more products using the “Good” tag. Clean. Goop” that contain known harsh chemicals. GCL claims that Goop’s alleged infringement of its trademarks may lead consumers to believe that GCL products also contain harmful substances.
GCL also states that consumers are likely to believe Goop products are clean when they are not. Instead, GCL states in the complaint that its marks must “signify that a product is truly clean.”
GCL says it can’t compete with Goop’s market saturation and says the alleged breach threatens its ability to expand into other product lines. GCL further claims that the allegedly infringing Goop marks are confusingly similar in sound, appearance, and overall marketing impression because the two dominant terms are identical.
“Use of the GOOP corporate mark does not negate the similarity between the marks, but exacerbates it, because use of Goop may create reverse confusion by leading consumers to believe that Goop, and not Good Clean Love, is the source of Good products Clean Love,” the complaint reads.
According to the complaint, Goop uses terms like “naked,” which is similar to GCL’s trademark registration for “Almost Naked.” GCL also argues that Goop’s actions could cause consumer confusion at major retailers, including Amazon and Target, as their products “head-on” top online search results.
GCL says Goop is aware of the alleged infringement because Goop once requested a sample of GCL’s lube product to potentially sell via Goop’s online marketplace.
GCL also says it sent a cease-and-desist letter to Goop regarding the “confusingly similar” branding, and the next day, Goop “began flooding the market with ads” for its products bearing the wording “Good.” Clean. Goop,” the complaint reads.
The complaint asserts five claims, including federal claims for trademark infringement, false advertising, unfair competition and similar claims under Oregon law.
GCL is seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the alleged infringement, a court order requiring Goop to “expressly abandon” its trademark application for “Good.” Clean. Goop”, damages, legal fees and costs.
Goop did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Cozen O’Connor represents GCL.