I've never owned a pair of Levi's, but I remember a good friend of mine once telling me that whenever she saw a Levi's commercial on TV, it was a sign that the economy was doing well. In short, Levi's was an economic indicator of sorts. I'm not sure how this all correlates to the rising number of lawsuits Levi's is initiating these days, but I'm quite certain it can't be good.
In an attempt to regain a niche in the designer denim market where True Religion and Paper Denim jeans easily sell for over $250, Levi's is suing other (more profitable) jean companies for copying their trademark back pocket stitching: the two intersecting arcs. In Levi's defense, I have noted an awful lot of copycats and arc variations on the market while perusing the jean racks so perhaps the company isn't entirely without complaint here.
Now for the real reason the company is hoping to stifle the competition:
But the privately held Levi’s, whose founder sewed together the first pair of jeans in 1873, has been unable to exploit the latest $200-a-pair denim craze — and now claims scores of smaller competitors are riding high because of what it created. When consumers’ tastes shifted toward designer jeans that were bejeweled, torn and frayed, Levi’s was still selling basic $30 pairs at K-Mart.
Not to question The New York Times on their fashion trend timeline categorization, but don't bejeweled, $30, and K-Mart all fall under the same classification?
The post offers verified useful to myself. It’s really informative and you’re simply obviously very knowledgeable in this area. You have got opened up my personal eye in order to various opinion of this particular matter together with intriquing, notable and solid content material.