MajorsOct 29, 2020
LVMH Snags Tiffany at Lower PriceMajorsMar 24, 2021
The Tiffany v. Costco Battle Wages On
Now returned to a lower court, the jeweler and the big-box retailer are locking horns over damages and Tiffany’s right to a jury trial.
Tiffany and Costco’s fight over the term “Tiffany Setting” continues, with the two battling it out over punitive damages and a jury trial. (Photo ® Tiffany & Co.)
New York—The battle wages on between Tiffany and Costco in what is a formative case for the jewelry industry regarding the use of the term “Tiffany setting.”
Tiffany & Co. first took Costco Wholesale Corp. to court in 2013, suing the big-box retailer in New York federal court for trademark infringement, counterfeiting and unfair business practices for selling rings in its stores labeled as “Tiffany” that were not made by Tiffany.
Costco filed a countersuit, claiming the term “Tiffany setting” had become genericized and could be used by any company to describe a ring with multiple, slender prongs holding a single stone. It asked the court to invalidate any federal trademark registrations that would prevent other retailers from using the term “Tiffany setting.”
A federal judge ruled in Tiffany’s favor in 2015, granting the jeweler’s motion for summary judgment (a judgment entered by the court without a full trial) in the case.
A jury decided on damages, ordering Costco to pay Tiffany $5.5 million for unlawful profits ($3.7 million in direct profits and $1.8 million for additional benefits derived from the ring sales) and $8.25 million in punitive damages.
The judge trebled the $3.7 million to $11 million, bringing the total amount Costco was to pay Tiffany to $21 million.
Last August, however, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the summary judgment on appeal from Costco.
The judges ruled unanimously that if a jury had heard the case, “reasonable” jurors could find Costco’s use of the word “Tiffany” wasn’t likely to confuse customers or make them think Tiffany had produced or endorsed the rings.
The appeals court sent the case back to the district court, where Tiffany and Costco are now at odds over punitive damages and the issue of a jury.
Related stories will be right here …
Tiffany & Co. first took Costco Wholesale Corp. to court in 2013, suing the big-box retailer in New York federal court for trademark infringement, counterfeiting and unfair business practices for selling rings in its stores labeled as “Tiffany” that were not made by Tiffany.
Costco filed a countersuit, claiming the term “Tiffany setting” had become genericized and could be used by any company to describe a ring with multiple, slender prongs holding a single stone. It asked the court to invalidate any federal trademark registrations that would prevent other retailers from using the term “Tiffany setting.”
A federal judge ruled in Tiffany’s favor in 2015, granting the jeweler’s motion for summary judgment (a judgment entered by the court without a full trial) in the case.
A jury decided on damages, ordering Costco to pay Tiffany $5.5 million for unlawful profits ($3.7 million in direct profits and $1.8 million for additional benefits derived from the ring sales) and $8.25 million in punitive damages.
The judge trebled the $3.7 million to $11 million, bringing the total amount Costco was to pay Tiffany to $21 million.
Last August, however, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the summary judgment on appeal from Costco.
The judges ruled unanimously that if a jury had heard the case, “reasonable” jurors could find Costco’s use of the word “Tiffany” wasn’t likely to confuse customers or make them think Tiffany had produced or endorsed the rings.
The appeals court sent the case back to the district court, where Tiffany and Costco are now at odds over punitive damages and the issue of a jury.
On Feb. 12, Costco filed a motion in limine seeking to prevent a jury trial in the case and blocking Tiffany from seeking punitive damages on grounds the jeweler needs to prove lost profits (which it is not seeking in the case) before it can ask for punitive damages.
Tiffany fired back earlier this month, arguing the district court has ruled multiple times—a total of six before this, in fact—that punitive damages are available to it under New York law and that “nothing material” has changed about the case since those prior rulings.
The court also previously determined that Tiffany is entitled to a jury and, the jeweler argued in its March 12 memo opposing the motion, one is needed to determine damages in the case.
The now LVMH-owned jeweler also pointed out Costco itself asked for the case to be presented to a jury when it filed its appeal.
Tiffany fired back earlier this month, arguing the district court has ruled multiple times—a total of six before this, in fact—that punitive damages are available to it under New York law and that “nothing material” has changed about the case since those prior rulings.
The court also previously determined that Tiffany is entitled to a jury and, the jeweler argued in its March 12 memo opposing the motion, one is needed to determine damages in the case.
The now LVMH-owned jeweler also pointed out Costco itself asked for the case to be presented to a jury when it filed its appeal.
Editors' Picks
Sponsored by
When, or if, another trial might take place remains unclear.
According to a joint status report filed March 12, Tiffany will not consent to a virtual trial, but said it could be ready for an in-person trial by July, if one can be held safely by then.
Court papers also indicate a settlement is not out of the question.
The two parties had a settlement discussion prior to the case going to trial in 2016 and have had additional discussions since the ruling on the appeal. Those discussions are continuing.
Tiffany v. Costco is filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
According to a joint status report filed March 12, Tiffany will not consent to a virtual trial, but said it could be ready for an in-person trial by July, if one can be held safely by then.
Court papers also indicate a settlement is not out of the question.
The two parties had a settlement discussion prior to the case going to trial in 2016 and have had additional discussions since the ruling on the appeal. Those discussions are continuing.
Tiffany v. Costco is filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
More on Majors
The Latest
Weekly QuizOct 03, 2024
This Week’s QuizTest your jewelry news knowledge by answering these questions.
PodcastsJan 12, 2026
Introducing My Next Question, the PodcastA monthly podcast series for jewelry professionals
Brought to you by
Navigating Cybersecurity: Essential Guidance for JewelersFrom protecting customer data to safeguarding inventory records, it's crucial to learn how to tackle cybersecurity challenges.
PodcastsNov 27, 2025
Test Podcast With VideoTest Podcast With Video. New interview with Ada Lovelace.
PodcastsNov 25, 2025
Test New Podcast PostAbstract for tests. New Podcast interview with John Lennon, Jimi Hendrix and Jim Morison.
ColumnistsOct 09, 2024
Peter Smith: 7 Things to Know When Selling LuxuryAhead of the holiday season, Smith delves into the often subconscious reasons people buy luxury products for themselves or their loved ones.
AuctionsOct 09, 2024
Rolex Worn on Apollo 14 Mission Up for SaleThe GMT-Master “Pepsi” belonging to astronaut Edgar Mitchell is a standout in RR Auction’s online “Space Auction,” going on now.
MajorsOct 09, 2024
PGI Launches New Virtual Sales TrainingRetail sales associates can access the video series on mobile to refresh their selling skills.
Policies & IssuesOct 09, 2024
GJNRF: Reaching Out, Rebuilding Futures For 25 years, India’s Gem & Jewellery National Relief Foundation has provided aid in the wake of war, natural disasters, and global crises.
AuctionsOct 08, 2024
Sotheby’s Selling Jewelry That Belonged to a Bulgarian TsarThe November auction will feature a collection of jewels owned by Ferdinand I, the first king of modern Bulgaria, and his family.
SourcingOct 08, 2024
Rio Tinto Begins New Phase of Production That Will Extend Diavik’s LifeCommercial production has begun underground at the Canadian diamond mine’s A21 pipe.
SurveysOct 08, 2024
What to Know About Online Shopping This Holiday SeasonDeloitte and Adobe Analytics shared their insights on the season, from the retail sales forecast to the role of generative AI.
CollectionsOct 08, 2024
Sylvie Adds New Men’s BandsThe Texas-based jeweler collaborated with luxury clothing brand Uncommon Man on men’s bands designed with European influences.
SourcingOct 08, 2024
Is Current Diamond Industry Turbulence Shaping a ‘New Normal’? Industry players have found ways to cope with market conditions while working to reshape themselves in the face of emerging realities.
SourcingOct 07, 2024
Rio Tinto to Offer 76 Diamonds in 2024 Beyond Rare Tender The sales event, in its second year, features a selection of rare diamonds from the miner’s Argyle and Diavik diamond mines.
CollectionsOct 07, 2024
Olympian Kristi Yamaguchi Partners With Heller Jewelers on New CollectionA portion of the proceeds from the “Always Dream” collection will go to Yamaguchi's foundation, supporting early childhood literacy.
SurveysOct 07, 2024
Hill & Co.’s New ‘Business of Jewelry Report’ Is OutThe first in what is slated to be a series of in-depth reports from the consulting company, it focuses on shortening supply chains.
