Adventures in Copyright

Adventures in Copyrights: Bootie Call

snaps.jpg
About a year ago, we first heard the phrase “Urban Counterfeiters.”

I thought it was sort of funny, but whatever - we’d always be grateful to the store that let us dress like ourselves when, at age fourteen, everyone else wanted to dress like Jennifer Aniston on Friends. Naturally, belly-baring mock turtlenecks didn’t make it past the parental dress code (otherwise known as the “Honey, are you really wearing that to school? Do you want to look in the mirror and think about it?”). Meanwhile, somehow dressing like Janis Joplin and Julie Delpy was encouraged.

Anyway, we’ve always had a soft spot for Urban Outfitters, but sometimes they make it hard for us.

Like today, when Glam Susan emails furiously to say they’ve ripped off an indie designer called Tashkent NYC.

Last year, they released an amazingly cool shoe called the J. Cole, and now it seems, the same boot has landed at Urbans.

But maybe the joke is on the chain store - Urbans prices their boot at almost $200 - not much less than Tashkent’s original boot, which is now on sale at Diani!

Comments

avatar
1

posted by Brittany

Nov 01, 2007 11:10AM

Urban does this all the time. There's a whole website about it, I think, especially in regards to t-shirt and furniture designs.

With that said, I think the Urban shoe looks much better than the original. The original doesn't seem complete and I like the wedge heel better. The Urban one also looks more comfortable. I don't think it's that blatant of a rip-off in comparison to other things they've ripped off which are pretty much on par with the original.

avatar
2

posted by guest

Nov 01, 2007 11:16AM

Didn't you buy the J. Crew blazer because it looked exactly like Balenciaga's? Why scold one company when you support another who did the same thing?

avatar
3

posted by Jen

Nov 01, 2007 11:34AM

Brittany - the original is the shoe with the wedge heel - the Urban Outfitters knock off is the shoe on the left.

I can't stand Urban Outfitters - Although, I think it's more the people who shop there that urk me. Maybe it's just the girls I went to high school with - but so many girls I knew would go there, buy the looks straight off the manikins, and then act as if they were some authority on fashion. It drove me crazy.

avatar
4

posted by guest

Nov 01, 2007 11:38AM

The wedge is the original...

avatar
5

posted by margaret

Nov 01, 2007 11:40AM

Both those shoes look like 90% of the shoes in stores right now.

avatar
6

posted by La Van

Nov 01, 2007 11:48AM

Wait a sec ... Urbans price their boot at $125, which is not "almost" $200, and isn't even close to the original price of the Tashkent boot ($420!!). It's not even close to the SALE price -- $252.

FWIW, I couldn't justify spending $420 or $250 on a shoe that wouldn't go the distance (meaning I probably wouldn't wear it for a few seasons, like I would a classic Cole Haan pump), but that's just me and I guess that's why Urban Outfitters knockoffs exist, too -- so people don't have to pay exorbitant prices for one-season's-worth shoes.

I get the outrage over "stealing" designs, but really, there's nothing new under the sun.

avatar
7

posted by stacy

Nov 01, 2007 11:59AM

Urban copied the Gryson Olivia bag and that set me off because it was the first designer bag I ever splurged on. The quality was shoddy at best, but I was still miffed the design had been borrowed.

By the way....Urban Outfitters was around when you were 14? How old are you? You must have lived in a big city.

avatar
8

posted by rachael

Nov 01, 2007 12:20PM

I'm 23, hardly grew up in a big city, and remember urban being around in my middle school days. Its been in a lot of college towns for many, many years.

avatar
9

posted by Hoyaheel

Nov 01, 2007 12:42PM

I'm, um, "older", and we had Urban Outfitters when I was in college in the early 90s.

avatar
10

posted by bianca

Nov 01, 2007 1:25PM

The brand is WeWhoSee, which is a brand I've seen in other stores. Are they secretly owned by Urban or something like lux or bdg?

avatar
11

posted by Rebe

Nov 01, 2007 1:27PM

Really? I had no knowlege of the brand before 1998. I remember other semi-hip catalogues, most notable Airshop. Anyone remember that one?

avatar
12

posted by cassie

Nov 01, 2007 1:28PM

The brand of those shoes is WeWhoSee, which is part of Faryl Robin. Carry the torch to their door, not Urban's. I would think Fashionista would understand the difference.

avatar
13

posted by Faran

Nov 01, 2007 1:48PM

Cassie, that's like saying you can condemn angry husbands to jail, but not the hit men who kill their wives. Everyone's responsible when it comes to counterfeits, and your argument is nitpicking, not helping to solve the larger issue.

avatar
14

posted by Megan

Nov 01, 2007 1:48PM

I like the Urban ones better.

avatar
15

posted by Anon

Nov 01, 2007 2:02PM

"Didn't you buy the J. Crew blazer because it looked exactly like Balenciaga's? Why scold one company when you support another who did the same thing?"

Good question!!! Can someone address this???

avatar
16

posted by La Van

Nov 01, 2007 2:04PM

Faran, wouldn't you consider the Urban shoe a knockoff, not a counterfeit? I think we need to define the terms.

Also I think that the overall argument will be strengthened here if melodrama is avoided. It may be distatsteful (or in some people's opinion, even immoral) to copy another's design, but to compare it to wife killing, even for argument's sake, seems a bit over the top.

avatar
17

posted by Dread Pirate Roberts

Nov 01, 2007 4:00PM

I agree, this is a knockoff, not a counterfeit. There are a few distinct differences even though the Urban version definitely evokes/is inspired by/whatever the original, which is honestly not all that different from a lot of the looks around lately. Sort of the platinum card/gold card/atm card versions of a look.

avatar
18

posted by Faran

Nov 01, 2007 4:35PM

Ah, let's see if I can answer all these questions in one swoop:

1. I'm 26; I started shopping at Urban Outfitters when I was 12. We had one in Cambridge, MA, which is where I grew up, and my dad used to take me to their bargain basement on weekends. I still have a pair of purple Levis that I bought when I was 14.

2. Everything's more fun when there's melodrama. Except Thanksgiving ;)

3. You're right that the heels and clasp of these shoes differ from the original, but the silhouette is exactly the same and it seems quite intentional.

Also, I think you may be taking the "adventures in counterfeits" title a little too literally, because yes, the only way it would be counterfeit is if it copied the logo from the original shoe. Even Forever 21's designs don't do that, but to me it seems beside the point.

3. Ah, the J. Crew blazer. I'm surprised Kiki hasn't accused me of getting paid by THEM, considering how much play that damn jacket gets on the site!

Actually, the blazer is different from Balenciaga's in a few key points. It's shaped very differently; the back and front are the same length. It's got traditional pockets, not the funky three-slim-slots thing that Ghesquiere inserted. There is no purple piping. There is no crest. And again - the shape is different.

It seems to me that J Crew wants to jump on a trend, but not necessarily a designer (remember, Thom Brown and Donna Karan showed military piped jackets too, and Marc before them, and Armani before him...)

If you think the distinction between these shoes follows a similar sentiment, well then, go out and buy the shoes (if you'd even wear the shoes, I wouldn't).

If you think, instead, that J. Crew should be sued by Balenciaga and I should turn my jacket into the authorities, well that's cool too, and it leads to the bigger discussion about what's illegal or unethical in fashion inspirations, and what's just the next leg of a movement.

In the meantime, whomever has called herself The Dread Pirate Roberts on our comment board deserves some sort of award.

xo F.

avatar
19

posted by La Van

Nov 01, 2007 5:09PM

Faran, with all due respect -- please slow down!

I'm not "taking the 'adventures in counterfeits' title a little too literally."

The title of this post isn't even "adventures in counterfeits," -- it's "adventures in COPYRIGHTS."

I was addressing your earlier comment: "Everyone's responsible when it comes to counterfeits, and [cassie's] argument is nitpicking, not helping to solve the larger issue."

Faran, you obviously care a great deal about knockoffs, counterfeiting, copyrights, and so on. If Fashionista intends to take these issues seriously, it would serve you and your readers well to be precise with the language, because the terms are not interchangeable.

avatar
20

posted by Julia

Nov 01, 2007 5:48PM

I think Faran was making fun of you with the "adventures in counterfeits remark." I know I was making fun of you when I read it.

avatar
21

posted by La Van

Nov 01, 2007 6:13PM

Making fun of me, eh? One day it's all counterfeits are bad because OMG don't you know you bitches you look so "varnished" (whatever the eff that means) and the next it's all about hit men and "the larger issue" (whatever the eff that means according to this site).

Laugh it up, Julia, at least I know who I am.

avatar
22

posted by Anon

Nov 01, 2007 6:39PM

Doesn't anyone remember the Vanessa Bruno boots from last year that looked like Tashkent's?

avatar
23

posted by stacy

Nov 01, 2007 7:33PM

Fine.

So I'm a 24-year-old who didn't know about Urban Outfitters when she was 14 and worshiped her Contempo Casuals card and thought that yellow tartan shorts (ala Alicia Silverstone in Clueless) were timeless.

Fine.

I'm making up for it now anyway, thanks to you Fashionista. Many thank yous for the tip on the Bluefly Chloe sale, I snagged myself a Paddington wallet.

Let's calm down people.

avatar
24

posted by yoko

Nov 01, 2007 10:03PM

not much less?? they're 125 less!!

avatar
25

posted by m

Nov 05, 2007 5:12PM

doesnt anyone remember Tata Subkoff for Easy Spirit two years ago? Thats where both of these companies knocked it off from. the one on the right is almost identical even with the suede tie in the back!

Post Your Comment