IP Law Daily, TRADEMARK—C.D. Cal.: Cond Nast files complaint against Dogue magazine publisher, (Dec 9, 2025)

By Thomas K. Lauletta, J.D.

The complaint alleges that the Dogue mark is confusingly similar to Cond Nast’s Vogue mark.

Cond Nast, the publisher of Vogue magazine, has filed a complaint against Advance Magazine Publishers, alleging that its Dogue magazine name is deliberately similar to the Vogue magazine name. The complaint alleges that this similarity will cause confusion that Condé Nast has endorsed or is associated with the Dogue magazine, to the detriment of Condé Nast ( Advance Magazine Publishers Inc. v. Tasty Work, LLC , No. 2:25-cv-11579 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2025)).

Condé Nast owns more than sixty trademarks relating to the Vogue magazine, which has been described as one of the longest-running and widely recognized fashion publications in the world.

According to the complaint, Dogue magazine is a periodical focusing on dogs, dog fashion, and celebrity owners. The complaint further alleges that without authorization from Condé Nast, the defendant intentionally designed Dogue to resemble Vogue in order to lead consumers into believing that the Dogue magazine was connected or associated with Vogue magazine. Until recently removed from its website, the founder of Dogue magazine stated that Dogue was “inspired by Vogue” and was “created in the style of Vogue.”

The complaint alleges that because of the defendant’s wrongful acts, Condé Nast has suffered and continues to suffer and/or is likely to suffer damage to its Vogue marks, to its business reputation and goodwill, and to sustain actual damages.

Accordingly, the complaint alleges causes of action for:

1. Trademark Infringement, 15 U.S.C. § 1114;

2. False Designation of Origin and Association, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a);

3. Trademark Dilution, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c);

4. Common Law Trademark Infringement;

5. Unfair Competition in Violation of California Bus. & Prof. Code; and

6. Common Law Unfair Competition.

The complaint also seeks injunctive relief against the defendant, prohibiting it from, among other things, the further sale and distribution of the Dogue magazine. Also, the complaint seeks: an award of damages suffered by Condé Nast according to proof at the time of trial; an order that the defendant account to Condé Nast for any and all profits earned as a result of Defendant’s acts in violation of Condé Nast’s rights under the Lanham Act and the common law; and an award of three times the amount of compensatory damages and increased profits pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117.

The Case is No. 2:25-cv-11579.

Attorneys: Paul A. Bost (Sheppard Mullin Richter and Hampton LLP) for Advance Magazine Publishers Inc. d/b/a Cond Nast.

Companies: Advance Magazine Publishers Inc. d/b/a Cond Nast; Tasty Work, LLC

News: Trademark CaliforniaNews