Coty Revenue Beats Estimates as Beauty Demand Holds Firm 
Hermès Stock Downgraded by RBC as Luxury Growth Premium Narrows 
Moderna Short Sellers Hit With $4.8 Billion Loss as Stock Soars 
Standard Chartered Expands Hedge Fund Access for Wealth Clients 
SEC Sues Former Tricolor Executives Over $1.9 Billion Investor Fraud Scheme 
Anthropic Eyes $10B-Plus Credit Line Ahead of Potential IPO 
OpenAI Tightens AI Safety Monitoring After Security Incidents 
Alibaba Sells Lingxi Games for Over $1.5 Billion Amid AI Push 
Goldman Sachs Names 9 Top Japanese Semiconductor and Electronics Stocks 
Moody’s Upgrades Vodafone Hybrid Debt Ratings to Baa3 
Shein Targets $26B-$27B Valuation for Hong Kong IPO 
SK Hynix Shares Surge on Record $28.6 Billion Buyback 
Lockheed Martin Secures $153.5 Million in U.S. Defense Contracts 
Nordson Stock Rises as Q3 Earnings Beat Estimates, Outlook Raised 
Unitree Robotics Shares Soar Over 600% in Shanghai Market Debut 
Moody’s Affirms NVIDIA Aa1 Rating as AI Data Center Guarantees Reach $105 Billion 
Schott Pharma Stock Rises as Barclays Upgrades Rating on Growth Outlook 
Add as a preferred source on Google
The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan overturned a $21 million judgment in favor of Tiffany & Co's against Costco Wholesale Corp over the latter's sale of diamond engagement rings bearing the "Tiffany" name.
In a 3-0 decision, the court agreed with Costco's argument that its use of the name "Tiffany" was unlikely to confuse customers. It also ruled that Costco may describe the style of its engagement rings even if confusion were likely.
Tiffany had sued Costco for trademark infringement in 2013 after an estimated 3,349 customers bought Tiffany-set rings at Costco during Valentine's Day season that year.
Costco countered that "Tiffany" had become a generic term, and claimed it had removed the "Tiffany" signage within a week after being contacted by that company.
The $21 million awarded to Tiffany, one of the world's most famous luxury retailers, included $11.1 million for lost profit due to the alleged infringement, $8.25 million in punitive damages, and interest.
