Instructions: In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.
Input: For the past decade, the Academy has continually disavowed “Oscar gift bags,” but this year the org is taking it further, suing Distinctive Assets. 
  
 On Feb. 16, the Academy went to California federal court and filed against Lash Fary, otherwise known as Distinctive Assets. The marketing company offers products to celebrities as a promotion and has been creating gift bags for several years. 
  
 Distinctive Assets is promoting its gifts with slogans such as “Everyone Wins at the Oscars! Nominee Gift Bags.” The company has received a lot of coverage by offering its goodies to Academy Award nominees, and the Academy last year asked for disclaimers that it has no affiliation with these packages. 
  
 “Last year, the Academy attempted to address Distinctive Assets’ false and infringing representation without litigation. We had no choice but to file a lawsuit,” an Academy spokesperson said on Friday. 
  
 The filing by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, repped by Quinn Emanuel attorneys, are seeking an injunction and trebled profits and damages, after clashing with the company last year. 
  
 Related Emmanuel 'Chivo' Lubezki on His Record-Breaking Oscar Win & Why the Speeches Never Get Easier 'Spotlight': A Win for 'the Film Everyone Loved' Caps an Unconventional Season 
  
 In this week’s filing, the Academy said, “Distinctive Assets’ continued use of the Academy’s trademarks not only infringes the Academy’s trademarks, but it is also likely to dilute the distinctiveness of the Academy’s famous trademarks and tarnish their goodwill.” 
  
 The complaint said that media coverage of the 2016 gift bags has focused on “the less-than-wholesome nature of some of the products contained in the bags,” citing a $5,500 certificate for plastic surgery, a $1,900 “vampire breast lift,” a $250 sex toy and a $250 marijuana vaporizer. 
  
 The Academy is already fighting to maintain its image amid the #OscarsSoWhite controversy. 
  
 In 2006, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences entered into long negotiations with the IRS. The Academy agreed to pay taxes on gift bags handed out to presenters and performers. As part of the settlement with the IRS, neither side would discuss the amount paid, or how far back the taxes extended. 
  
 At that point, the Academy decided to discontinue the gift bags — and other companies took over. 
  
 In 2012, Distinctive Assets offered an Everybody Wins package, touting the gifts as a great consolation prize for anyone who didn’t win an Oscar in the directing or four acting categories. 
  
 Last year, Distinctive Assets offered gifts that were more “wholesome,” including a luxury train ride through the Canadian Rockies worth more than $14,500; a “glamping” trip valued at $12,500; a year’s worth of all-Audi A4 car rental from Silvercar valued at $20,000; and a Reset Yourself lifestyle makeover package worth more than $14,200. 
  
 However, last year’s package also included a vibrator, vaporizer and $20,000 gift certificate to have Enigma Life founder Olessia Kantor fly out to meet with each nominee “to discuss their 2015 horoscope, analyze dreams and teach them mind control techniques.” 
  
 Meanwhile, one of this year’s items, a luxury trip to Israel funded by the government, has come under fire from Artists for Palestine UK, with the organization imploring attendees to “give your bag to a Palestinian refugee.” 
  
 Last year, immediately following the Oscar ceremony, a rep at 3D Public Relations and Marketing told Variety that all of the losing nominees in the acting and directing categories (and host Neil Patrick Harris) accepted these bags. That meant 21 bags went out, at an estimated value of more than $2.5 million. 
  
 While the bags are great promotion for the companies involved, it’s dubious how many of the offers are redeemed by the stars. When the Academy gave out gift bags, George Clooney was one of the stars who donated the goods to charity. At an auction, his bag brought $45,000. 
  
 The Academy spokesperson also said on Wednesday, “Distinctive Assets has been falsely representing that its extravagant ‘gift bags’ [are] redistributed by the Academy, at its direction, or with its endorsement or approval. The Academy has no affiliation with Distinctive Assets. It does not hire Distinctive Assets, consult with it, or help it distribute gift bags. All reports of an ‘official Oscar gift bag,’ or a fight bag distributed at the Oscars containing the products Distinctive Assets promotes, are untrue.” ||||| A marketing firm is being blamed for tarnishing the goodwill of the Academy Awards by prompting media stories focusing on the "less-than-wholesome nature of some of the products contained in the bags." 
  
 See any stories of late about expensive swag that attendees to the upcoming Academy Awards are getting? The Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences certainly has — and it's not pleased. The social media hashtag that has prompted a lawsuit this award season is not #OscarsSoWhite. Rather, it's #OscarGiftBag. 
  
 On Tuesday, the Academy went to California federal court against Lash Fary, otherwise known as Distinctive Assets, a marketing company that specializes in product promotion through celebrity integration. 
  
 The organization that puts on the Oscars says it has no affiliation with gift bags said to contain hundreds of thousands of dollars of merchandise including vape pens and vibrators. But according to its complaint asserting trademark infringement, the defendant is nonetheless confusing consumers with slogans such as "Everyone Wins At The Oscars®! Nominee Gift Bags," and "Everyone Wins Nominee Gift Bags in Honor of the Oscars®." 
  
 Quite a few big media outlets including Glamour, The Telegraph and TMZ have fallen for the promotional stunt. For example, here's Vanity Fair's story in 2015 headlined, "Oscars Gift Bag: Take a Peek Inside This Year's $168,000 Bounty." 
  
 "Deeply concerned about the confusion Distinctive Assets was spreading, the Academy’s legal counsel wrote Distinctive Assets on or about February 17, 2015, to inform it that it 'is critical that no one be confused into believing that your gift bags are associated with or have any connection with the Academy,' " states the suit (read in full here). 
  
 The Academy requested that the company's communications make clear that the Academy does not award, sponsor, endorse or provide these gift bags. 
  
 It took another couple of weeks — following more stories, a Facebook post from the defendant with the hashtag #OscarGiftBag and a second legal warning — for Distinctive Assets to reply it "will not purposefully make an association between its gift bags and AMPAS going forward." 
  
 Now, it's 2016, and Distinctive Assets is allegedly up to its grab bag of tricks again, only slightly altering its slogan. 
  
 "But Distinctive Assets’ new tagline is hardly the only means it is now using to advance the false idea that it is connected to the Academy and the Oscars," adds the lawsuit. "On or about February 5, 2016, Distinctive Assets used the Academy’s OSCARS trademark on its social media Twitter account to describe its gift bag and posted a link to an article [at the Daily Beast] about the bags titled "Inside the Absurd $200K Oscar Gift Bag: Vapes, a Trip to Israel, and a Vampire Breast Lift." 
  
 The Academy says no disclaimers were used, and that a wave of articles about Oscar gift bags followed (including by The Hollywood Reporter). "The media coverage reveals that Distinctive Assets appears to be taking no steps to stop wrongfully implying a relationship with the Academy," complains the plaintiff. 
  
 The coverage is too much for the Academy Awards. 
  
 "Distinctive Assets’ continued use of the Academy’s trademarks not only infringes the Academy’s trademarks, but it is also likely to dilute the distinctiveness of the Academy’s famous trademarks and tarnish their goodwill," states the complaint. "Press about the 2016 gift bags has focused on both the less-than-wholesome nature of some of the products contained in the bags, which purportedly include a $250 marijuana vaporizer, a $1,900 "vampire breast lift," skin treatments by Park Avenue plastic surgeons valued at more than $5,500, a $250 sex toy, and $275 Swiss-made toilet paper, and the unseemliness of giving such high value gifts, including trips costing tens of thousands of dollars, to an elite group of celebrities." 
  
 The Academy, represented by attorneys at Quinn Emanuel, is now seeking an injunction and trebled profits and damages. Distinctive Assets couldn't immediately be reached for comment. |||||
Output:
The $232,000 "swag bag" being handed out at this year's Oscars made a lot of headlines thanks to the inclusion of items like a vaping system and a sex toy—and the Academy isn't happy about it. On Tuesday, the organization sued Distinctive Assets, the marketing company behind the bags, according to the Hollywood Reporter. The Academy actually has no affiliation with the gift bags, which are meant to promote products by associating them with celebrities, but Distinctive Assets makes it seem like the gift bags are affiliated with the awards show by giving them names like "Everyone Wins At The Oscars®! Nominee Gift Bags." As Variety explains, the Academy stopped providing gift bags in 2006, and other companies stepped into the void. Per the lawsuit, the Academy informed Distinctive Assets last year that it "is critical that no one be confused into believing that your gift bags are associated with or have any connection with the Academy," and Distinctive Assets ultimately agreed to "not purposefully make an association between its gift bags and AMPAS going forward." But Distinctive Assets continues to imply the gift bags are sponsored or endorsed in some way by the Oscars, leading to this year's suit. Distinctive Assets' antics are "likely to ... tarnish [the Academy's] goodwill" thanks to press coverage that is "focused on ... the less-than-wholesome nature of some of the products contained in the bag," says the suit, which seeks an injunction and damages. (Here's what's in the bag.)