It was only a matter of time. San Francisco–based home retail giant Williams-Sonoma has filed a lawsuit against DTC up-and-comer Quince, alleging false advertising and unfair business practices.
“Quince has engaged in a widespread false advertising campaign against WSI that leverages the significant goodwill of the WSI Brands, falsely represents that Quince’s goods are the same as or ‘like’ WSI’s products, and fabricates the prices of WSI’s products to perpetuate the fiction that customers are paying significantly less at Quince for the same product sold by WSI,” reads the complaint, which was filed late Friday evening. Williams-Sonoma asks the court to provide an injunction against Quince’s advertising as well as “an award to WSI of Quince’s profits received from its misconduct.”
Founded in 2018 by entrepreneur Sid Gupta, Quince rose to prominence with a DTC-on-steroids model: The brand works with suppliers to grind down the cost of key items, then ships to consumers directly from the factory, allowing it to offer low prices. Its early successes came through bedding and apparel (to a certain consumer, ads for its $59 cashmere sweaters are unavoidable online), though the brand has since deepened its home offering with tabletop, rugs, lighting, case goods and upholstery. To date, Quince has raised more than $450 million in venture capital money, and a recent Wall Street Journal profile pegged its annual revenue at $1.1 billion.
Quince is frequently described as a “dupe” brand. Key to its approach is identifying bestsellers in the marketplace, producing a similar item, and advertising against well-known competitors. Every product listed on its website includes a chart comparing it to an allegedly comparable item. The brand also frequently runs paid marketing spots along the lines of “Pottery Barn quality for half the price” or “Like West Elm but $100 less.”
It’s precisely these practices that have provoked Williams-Sonoma. Across a blistering 38-page suit, the retailer accuses Quince of falsely comparing its own product with items from Pottery Barn, Rejuvenation and Williams-Sonoma itself. “By brand-washing its ads, Quince creates the false impression that consumers will receive comparable quality and design,” reads the complaint. “In reality they may be purchasing unrelated items of often inferior quality.”
The suit suggests that Williams-Sonoma and Quince have been privately feuding about the issue in the run-up to the lawsuit (“Quince asserted WSI’s claims were ‘frivolous’ and challenged WSI to a legal battle, stating ‘Quince would welcome a public skirmish’”) and generally seeks to paint the DTC upstart as unscrupulous, alleging that it misrepresents the number of five-star reviews its products receive.
This is not the first time Quince has taken legal heat—both Coach and the maker of Uggs have sued—though typically brands focus their case around IP theft as opposed to homing in on false advertising claims. However, it’s a familiar line of attack for Williams-Sonoma, which sued price-comparison site Dupe.com in 2024 along similar lines. That case settled out of court last month.
