This week’s BL Business Branding Newsletter set the table for a legal battle between Williams-Sonoma, Inc. (“WSI”) and Last Brand, Inc., the parent company of “luxury for less” retailer Quince. At the center of the dispute is a familiar question in today’s consumer economy – when does selling a “dupe” cross the line from friendly competition into unlawful deception?
In a lawsuit filed in late November in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Williams-Sonoma, Inc. (“WSI”) accuses Quince of running a widespread false advertising campaign that allegedly uses the reputation of established home brands while misleading consumers into believing Quince products are equivalent to, or substitutes for, iconic offerings from Pottery Barn, West Elm, Williams Sonoma, and Rejuvenation.
WSI describes Quince as a classic dupe disruptor. Founded in 2020, Quince built its brand around the promise of delivering “the same luxury products” without the luxury price tag. While that messaging initially centered on apparel, WSI alleges Quince has expanded its dupe strategy into home furnishings, rugs, lighting, cookware, bedding, and decor, using comparison-heavy marketing that closely mirrors WSI’s product lines.
According to the complaint, Quince’s dupe model relies on positioning its products as direct stand-ins for WSI goods, despite differences in design, materials, and construction. Rather than clearly distinguishing its offerings, WSI claims Quince intentionally blurs the line by suggesting consumers can get the “same thing” for less.
At the center of the dispute are Quince’s “Beyond Compare” charts and social media advertising, which WSI says frame Quince products as one-to-one dupes while failing to identify specific products. The lawsuit also alleges Quince inflates competitor pricing to exaggerate savings and promotes influencer-style ads claiming products are “like Pottery Barn” or “like Williams Sonoma,” even when the referenced products never existed, leaving those comparisons without a solid leg to stand on.
WSI also challenges whether Quince’s products live up to the luxury qualities implied by its dupe marketing. The complaint alleges misrepresentations around materials and certifications, questions the use of premium textile claims at mass-market prices, and accuses Quince of amplifying its dupe narrative through selectively displayed reviews that overstate consumer enthusiasm.
What Can Businesses Learn From This?
The Williams-Sonoma lawsuit highlights the legal risks inherent in duping culture. While consumers increasingly seek lower-priced alternatives, brands that market products as “the same as” a competitor must tread carefully. Comparing products, inflated pricing references, or implied endorsements can quickly turn dupe marketing into false advertising.
This dispute also shows the importance of defending not just trademarks and logos, but also the broader brand story and consumer perception. As dupe culture continues to expand beyond beauty and fashion into home goods and lifestyle, courts may increasingly be asked to decide where imitation ends—and infringement begins.
Want to know more about how to protect your brand? Contact our BL Trademark Team by reaching out to Seth Berenzweig at sberenzweig@berenzweiglaw.com today.