A long, long time ago, in a Golden State far, far away, a denim genius built dungarees for working stiffs. We know him now as Levi Strauss. Or, more likely, as the namesake of modern day Levi's jeans.
But Blawgletter didn't know — and perhaps you didn't either — that a key feature of the Straussian allure goes by the name of "arcuate". That word describes the gold stitching on both back pockets of a pair of the genuine Levi's britches. See here:
The case pitted Levi's against another famous clothing outfit, Abercrombie & Fitch. The latter used pocket stitching that, some might say, recalls the Levi's arcuate. Judge for yourself:
The district court ruled that the A&F design didn't violate the federal anti-dilution statute, because, among other reasons, it didn't look "identical or nearly identical" to the Levi's mark. But the Ninth Circuit noted that Congress changed the federal dilution statute in 2006 because it didn't like judicial rulings that, you might say, diluted the anti-dilution protection. The identical or nearly identical test, the panel pointed out, hadn't survived passage of the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006. See 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c). The new law in fact condemned not only "tarnishment" of a trademark but also "blurring" of it. Because the district court used the old standard, the panel held, the judgment for A&F couldn't stand. Levi Strauss & Co. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Co., No. 09-16322 (9th Cir. Feb. 8, 2011).
Of course the great innovation of Mr. Strauss consisted not of gold stitching but of copper rivets to make pants pockets stronger. But don't think I'm telling the cow how to eat the cabbage.