Tiffany Blue: color as a brand commercial asset
How to reproduce Tiffany Blue without errors
Pantone 1837 Blue — a proprietary formula created in 2001 specifically for Tiffany and closed off from the public Pantone Matching System palette. Even with a full Pantone catalog, you will not find this color in open access: the license belongs exclusively to Tiffany and its printhouses. Everything offered on the internet as the 'Tiffany Blue code' is an approximation, not the original.
| Medium | Designation | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|
| Printing (packaging, catalogs) | Pantone 1837 (proprietary) | Reference, available only to Tiffany and licensed printhouses |
| Web / digital interfaces | HEX #0ABAB5, RGB (10, 186, 181) | Approximation, officially used where Pantone is not available |
| Physical materials (textiles, wall painting) | Individual formula per material | Requires calibration for a specific surface, does not match 1:1 with print and web |
The difference between HEX and Pantone here is not a technical detail, but a conscious brand choice. The digital approximation is easy to copy in five minutes in any graphic editor. The original print formula — no: it is protected at the level of production and licensing agreements with a limited circle of partners.
Where does trademark protection end
Registration 1998 year protects color not as an abstraction, but in connection with specific product categories — packaging (boxes, bags, tape), jewelry cases, elements of retail identity. This is a fundamental limitation: a trademark on color does not automatically prohibit using a similar shade outside these categories.
- Protection is strong in the jewelry retail and packaging sectors, where consumers can realistically confuse the source of the product.
- Protection is weak or absent in categories not related to luxury retail — automotive, electronics, food products, if there is no risk of brand confusion.
- Each new case of using the shade is considered separately by the court, evaluating the probability of consumer confusion rather than the mere fact of visual similarity.
Nissan, Costco, and other attempts to replicate the shade
In 2013 year, Tiffany sued Costco for using the word "Tiffany" on ring display tags. Formally, this was a dispute over a word mark, not a color, but it showed how rigorously the company protects any association with the brand—even indirect. A more illustrative case for color was the claims against Nissan, which used a similar turquoise shade in car styling. Automotive and jewelry retail are different product categories, and literally speaking, Tiffany had no automatic rights outside its own sphere. However, this case became a benchmark for judicial practice: courts recognized that a highly recognizable color may receive broader protection than the original category if the brand proves the risk of reputation dilution (dilution), not merely direct consumer confusion.
How much does the blue cost in the LVMH deal for $16,2 billion
There is no exact figure of 'how many dollars exactly — is the color' in any open transaction document. LVMH has not disclosed the breakdown of the cost by assets. But there is a strong indirect confirmation that the color was considered a separate financial risk: lawyers from Arnaud conducted a special review of all rights and protections for the blue shade as a separate item in due diligence — on par with real estate and patents. Brand Finance evaluated the Tiffany & Co. brand at $5,895 billion in 2019 and at $8,84 billion in 2023, directly naming the color trademark as an 'integral part' of this value. The color is not listed as a separate line item in the balance sheet, but without it the brand valuation would have been different — this is acknowledged by the appraisers themselves.
What this means for brands that want to protect their color
Tiffany's experience shows three conditions without which protection of color as a trademark becomes a fiction. First, there needs to be a decade-long history of continuous and consistent use of one shade within one product category — the court looks at the history, not the fact of registration. Second, the shade must be separated from the logo and font: Tiffany protected the color of the box, not the combination with the inscription. Third, there needs to be a proprietary, non-public formula — a public HEX code cannot be protected in court almost at all, because it is difficult to prove intent to copy if the color is publicly available.
- Develop a proprietary formula for the color separately for printing and separately for digital media.
- Limit the licenses for using the formula to a narrow circle of manufacturers and printers.
- Register the color in connection with specific product categories, not abstractly.
- Years of maintaining visual consistency is the main argument in court, not the fact of registration itself.
For most brands, this path does not pay off: the judicial protection of color costs more than the benefit from exclusivity. Tiffany is rather an exception that confirms the rule, not a universal playbook.
How to reproduce Tiffany Blue without errors
Pantone 1837 Blue — a proprietary formula created in 2001 specifically for Tiffany and closed off from the public Pantone Matching System palette. Even with a full Pantone catalog, you will not find this color in open access: the license belongs exclusively to Tiffany and its printhouses. Everything offered on the internet as the 'Tiffany Blue code' is an approximation, not the original.
| Medium | Designation | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|
| Printing (packaging, catalogs) | Pantone 1837 (proprietary) | Reference, available only to Tiffany and licensed printhouses |
| Web / digital interfaces | HEX #0ABAB5, RGB (10, 186, 181) | Approximation, officially used where Pantone is not available |
| Physical materials (textiles, wall painting) | Individual formula per material | Requires calibration for a specific surface, does not match 1:1 with print and web |
The difference between HEX and Pantone here is not a technical detail, but a conscious brand choice. The digital approximation is easy to copy in five minutes in any graphic editor. The original print formula — no: it is protected at the level of production and licensing agreements with a limited circle of partners.
Where does trademark protection end
Registration 1998 year protects color not as an abstraction, but in connection with specific product categories — packaging (boxes, bags, tape), jewelry cases, elements of retail identity. This is a fundamental limitation: a trademark on color does not automatically prohibit using a similar shade outside these categories.
- Protection is strong in the jewelry retail and packaging sectors, where consumers can realistically confuse the source of the product.
- Protection is weak or absent in categories not related to luxury retail — automotive, electronics, food products, if there is no risk of brand confusion.
- Each new case of using the shade is considered separately by the court, evaluating the probability of consumer confusion rather than the mere fact of visual similarity.
Nissan, Costco, and other attempts to replicate the shade
In 2013 year, Tiffany sued Costco for using the word "Tiffany" on ring display tags. Formally, this was a dispute over a word mark, not a color, but it showed how rigorously the company protects any association with the brand—even indirect. A more illustrative case for color was the claims against Nissan, which used a similar turquoise shade in car styling. Automotive and jewelry retail are different product categories, and literally speaking, Tiffany had no automatic rights outside its own sphere. However, this case became a benchmark for judicial practice: courts recognized that a highly recognizable color may receive broader protection than the original category if the brand proves the risk of reputation dilution (dilution), not merely direct consumer confusion.
How much does the blue cost in the LVMH deal for $16,2 billion
There is no exact figure of 'how many dollars exactly — is the color' in any open transaction document. LVMH has not disclosed the breakdown of the cost by assets. But there is a strong indirect confirmation that the color was considered a separate financial risk: lawyers from Arnaud conducted a special review of all rights and protections for the blue shade as a separate item in due diligence — on par with real estate and patents. Brand Finance evaluated the Tiffany & Co. brand at $5,895 billion in 2019 and at $8,84 billion in 2023, directly naming the color trademark as an 'integral part' of this value. The color is not listed as a separate line item in the balance sheet, but without it the brand valuation would have been different — this is acknowledged by the appraisers themselves.
What this means for brands that want to protect their color
Tiffany's experience shows three conditions without which protection of color as a trademark becomes a fiction. First, there needs to be a decade-long history of continuous and consistent use of one shade within one product category — the court looks at the history, not the fact of registration. Second, the shade must be separated from the logo and font: Tiffany protected the color of the box, not the combination with the inscription. Third, there needs to be a proprietary, non-public formula — a public HEX code cannot be protected in court almost at all, because it is difficult to prove intent to copy if the color is publicly available.
- Develop a proprietary formula for the color separately for printing and separately for digital media.
- Limit the licenses for using the formula to a narrow circle of manufacturers and printers.
- Register the color in connection with specific product categories, not abstractly.
- Years of maintaining visual consistency is the main argument in court, not the fact of registration itself.
For most brands, this path does not pay off: the judicial protection of color costs more than the benefit from exclusivity. Tiffany is rather an exception that confirms the rule, not a universal playbook.
Recent articles
MegaFon, BMW, VTB and more 240+ companies. See how it looks in the showcase reel:
Our branding agency is approached to order:
Branding agency services
