MCoBeauty, an Australian beauty brand marketing itself as an affordable option, is defending itself against two copyright lawsuits in the US, with a recent bid to dismiss the cases.
In what could be a monumental decision against alleged “dupe” products, MCoBeauty was served with papers by skincare brand Sol de Janeiro on January 28, 2025, and by Aramara Beauty – the company behind Glow Recipe – on June 6, 2025.
The Sol de Janeiro case alleges that the Dennis Bastas-owned retailer copied some of its fragrance products. “To seize on the popularity of Sol de Janeiro’s Cheirosa Perfume Mists – MCoBeauty created cheap knockoffs,” the court filing written by the plaintiff read.
It continued: “MCoBeauty publishes, endorses, sponsors, hosts, and/or supports on MCoBeauty’s website and on social media statements that MCoBeauty’s fragrances are copies or duplicates of four of Sol de Janeiro’s popular line of Cheirosa Perfume Mists.”
The complaint also includes alleged examples of MCoBeauty endorsing claims of its products’ likeness to Sol de Janeiro’s.
Inside Retail has approached MCoBeauty for a comment.
MCoBeauty defended these claims by arguing that Sol de Janeiro can’t prove any likelihood of confusion between the two companies’ products; it also, among other defences, argues that its products are protected by American Fair Use laws.
Fair Use laws in America form a key protection under the country’s Copyright Act. In Section 107 of this Act, it is permitted for one to exercise a limited use of copyrighted material without permission for a variety of purposes; it is understood that the ruling of this case could provide defining case law on the strength of the Fair Use defence in “dupe” product cases.
In late March, MCoBeauty filed a motion to dismiss the Sol de Janeiro case after the plaintiff widened the scope of its complaint to include further products. The motion was filed on the grounds that Sol de Janeiro’s recent half-year earnings information included record revenues, something which MCoBeauty argue is proof that the plaintiff hasn’t incurred “injury in fact”.
While this motion is under review by the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, Sol de Janeiro continues to pursue its claims.
