Gucci, as withmany internationally-renowned brands, no longer operates in Russia. In its stead, however, is ICCUG.
As reported byThe Fashion Law, a new ‘GUCCI CAFE’ has sprung up in Moscow without any association or authorization by the Kering-parented luxury house. The restaurant was, in fact, founded by rappers Yegor Kreed and Timati, and restaurateur Anton Pinskiy—two of whom own the infamous, post-invasion Starbucks knockoff, Stars Coffee.
Just like their chain of uncanny Starbucks copycats, Timati and Pinskiy’s GUCCI CAFE betrays few cues that it was opened without consent (’cept for the fact that it exists in Russia, of course). The entire outfit is tricked out in the GG monogram, which is wrapped around the furniture and graffitied on the walls.
A GUCCI cafe has been opened in Russia — without Gucci's permission, of course. The logo is an upside-down GUCCI CAFE, and the furniture inside is upholstered in fabric with GG monograms. The owners also applied for trademarks: inverted GUCCI, DOM GUCCI, and GUCCI CAFE. pic.twitter.com/Q895bqd1ye
On the façade, the name ‘GUCCI CAFE’—flipped upside down—takes the entrance.
Cringe of the week: Russian celebs Egor Kreed and Timati have opened “Gucci Cafe” in Moscow, without Gucci’s permission…
They say the Gucci trademark doesn’t apply to the hospitality industry. I wonder if more Western brands will see their IP used in Russia without permission pic.twitter.com/FSyktOZI6z
The loophole is that the restaurateurs have trademarked backwards and upside-down stylizations of “GUCCI CAFE,” “GUCCI,” and “DOM GUCCI” (House of Gucci) wordmarks.
Plus, as of last year, the government began allowing citizens to co-opt copyrights and trademarks belonging to countries that have backed out of Russia, emboldening and incentivizing many to build their businesses off the backs of others’ prestige.
Per the report, Pinskiy’s company has argued that no infringement has occurred since the cafe’s owners have only filed trademark registrations for “EFAC ICCUG,” and not “GUCCI CAFE.”
A Gucci representative confirms that the fashion house did not consent to the opening of this branch, and that it will “take all necessary protective measures” to block the trademarks.