Former Estee Lauder chair tells INTA sea stories

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Former Estee Lauder chair tells INTA sea stories

“In the Navy you don’t learn from textbooks, you have sea stories instead,” Leonard A. Lauder told attendees in his keynote speech at the opening ceremony yesterday. The Chairman Emeritus of The Estée Lauder Companies, Lauder joined his parents’ company in 1958 when he left the US Navy. “I looked pretty sexy in that Navy uniform,” he remembered.

With affecting honesty and humor, Lauder told several of these “sea stories” about the Estée Lauder brands, their successes and failures, in the hope of revealing some lessons for attendees: “In the 1950s there was a saying among advertising executives—the kind you see in the television series Mad Men today. They used to say: ‘Let’s get down on all fours and look at this from the client’s perspective.’ Well here goes,” he said.

The first story described the launch of beauty brand Clinique in 1968. The company and its lawyers had searched thoroughly for similar trademarks and, satisfied there was nothing similar out there, went ahead with production. But a month before launch, the lawyers phoned to say there had been a complaint from a product called Astringent Clinique. “We looked under ‘C’ but we forgot to look under ‘A’,” said Lauder.

The mark was registered by a magazine called Cat Fancy. Lauder went to talk to the owner, who asked for 5% of Clinique’s revenues in payment. The company paid $100,000 over five years instead—which has proven to be a wise decision, given Clinique’s growth. “I adore that trademark and I think the lesson is: you can never be too careful,” Lauder told the audience.

He loved another brand, Origins, so much that he bought the company. But a shop in Santa Fe, New Mexico, sued, claiming Lauder and his wife had been into the shop, liked the name and launched the brand to copy it. “Now I had bought Origins two years before this woman (who cried a lot!) claimed I had gone in. But did that make me right? My lawyers advised me that I would win eventually, but only after I had lost to a jury and appealed a couple of times. It was much cheaper to settle, so we did, and I’ve been glad ever since. Being right is one thing, but living well is another. And I like living,” Lauder told the audience, to a round of applause.

So what was the lesson from that experience? “As a lawyer it’s your job to convince clients that they don’t have to win every time. They are probably very successful, they probably win at business, at golf, at everything. You need to tell them not to spend all their money on you, just to be right.”

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article