Can You Own a Colour? – What Happens When Identity Becomes Intellectual Property 

Tiffany didn’t invent blue. Louboutin didn’t create red. And Cadbury didn’t discover purple. 
Yet all three turned their colors into something more powerful than pigments – they turned them into identity. 

For years, brands have spent fortunes designing logos and slogans. But lately, courts have been flooded with a subtler question: can a color itself be owned? 

It sounds absurd until you realize that a specific shade can trigger instant recognition, emotion, and loyalty. 
A Tiffany box, even before it’s opened, feels like a promise. 
Louboutin’s red soles announce status with a single step. 
And Cadbury’s purple? It’s nostalgia wrapped in foil. 

Behind each of these hues lies a legal story – one that changed how we think about ownership, creativity, and branding. 

Tiffany & Co. – When Blue Became Luxury 

Long before influencer marketing or digital ads, Tiffany & Co. mastered the art of association. The company trademarked its iconic Tiffany Blue – officially known as Pantone 1837, the year the brand was founded. 

Used consistently on its boxes, bags, and packaging, the color became inseparable from Tiffany’s identity. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recognizes it as a visual signature that identifies Tiffany’s products before you even read the name. 

The blue isn’t protected because it’s beautiful – it’s protected because it’s distinctive. 
That’s what trademark law safeguards: not the color itself, but the connection it creates in a consumer’s mind. 

Christian Louboutin – The Red Sole Revolution 

The French designer Christian Louboutin painted the soles of his heels bright red – inspired by a bottle of nail polish on his assistant’s desk. 
That single decision became an empire. 

When Yves Saint Laurent (YSL) released an all-red shoe, Louboutin sued, claiming trademark infringement. 
In the 2012 case Christian Louboutin S.A. v. Yves Saint Laurent America Holdings, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in his favor – but with limits. 

Louboutin’s red sole was deemed a valid trademark only when it contrasts with the rest of the shoe. 
A fully red shoe? Allowed. 
A black shoe with a red sole? That’s Louboutin. 

It was a landmark decision proving that in trademark law, context defines ownership. 

Cadbury – When Purple Lost Its Protection 

Cadbury’s royal purple (Pantone 2685C) has wrapped its chocolates for over a century, becoming a symbol of comfort and familiarity. But when the brand tried to trademark that shade, the U.K. Court of Appeal (2013) ruled against it. 
Cadbury’s description – “the predominant color on packaging” – was too vague to qualify for protection. 

In trademark law, fame isn’t enough; clarity is power. 
Cadbury’s purple may be iconic, but it remains unowned in the eyes of the law. 

The Takeaway 

Color can’t be copyrighted – but it can be trademarked if it’s distinctive, consistent, and clearly defined. From Tiffany’s blue boxes to Louboutin’s red soles, color has evolved from design choice to legal identity. 
When a brand can make a color mean something, the law steps in to protect that meaning. 

Draft n Craft: Protecting What Makes You Distinct 

At Draft n Craft, we help attorneys and brands transform originality into ownership. 
Our intellectual property and trademark support services cover everything from comprehensive research and filings to drafting, documentation, and monitoring. 

Whether it’s a color, logo, or packaging design, our IP experts ensure your brand identity is protected with precision and compliance. 
Because in today’s marketplace, what stands out must also stand strong. 

Draft n Craft Trademark Services at a Glance – 

Explore – Trademark-Solutions/