Adventures in Copyright: Target Does DVF

Jan 16, 2008 @ 12:00pm

Since Diane Von Furstenberg spearheaded the war against Forever 21's compulsive copying, they've backed off using her unmistakable prints.

So Target's picked up the tradition and ripped her off instead. They're clearly not concerned with subtly since they even used the print on a wrap dress, Diane's classic shape.

The beige and navy blue leopard print is from Diane's Spring '07 line. She used it everywhere, from bathing suits to dresses to scarves, and on an identical wrap dress that's nowhere to be found online.

We don't know many people who will wear an entire dress of magnified leopard print, but if you're one of them, a) we admire your courage and b) we hope you sprung for the subtler DVF version.

Is Target the next victim of Diane's wrath?

posted by guest

Jan 16, 2008 12:58PM

how is leopard print an original design?

posted by Katie

Jan 16, 2008 1:33PM

I think leopards should be the ones suing.
That dress is hideous.

posted by guest

Jan 16, 2008 1:35PM

i don't see it.

posted by guest

Jan 16, 2008 1:35PM

Well, if that's the case then DVF ripped of Cavelli.

posted by Ali

Jan 16, 2008 2:29PM

Sorry, but I think it's a stretch. The prints aren't exactly the same, and so many designers use leopard - it's not even a print DVF is known for.

posted by louis

Jan 16, 2008 2:42PM

The dress is hideous. The pattern is hideous.
DVF needs to relax. And focus on meaningful tasks.

And praised to F21 for copying styles and selling them for $20!

posted by ilchicag

Jan 16, 2008 2:59PM

posted by guest

Jan 16, 2008 3:23PM

How uninformed and ill-experienced are the writers for fashionista?! This post is ridiculous.

posted by guest

Jan 16, 2008 4:02PM

It's actually a knockoff of DVF's Spotted Frog print...which came in this beige tone and also a stunning green/blue.

posted by Lindsaysue12

Jan 16, 2008 4:03PM

I can somewhat see what your saying here. But I doubt it. How bout DVF does target instead!?

posted by kenya

Jan 16, 2008 4:04PM

wow, how mean are some of the commenters. its very easy to anonymously rip someone apart and offer nothing insightful to the conversation.

posted by guest

Jan 16, 2008 4:26PM

Wow, what is with these commenters? After all, DVF did invent the wrap dress and she did make them in leopard before anyone else (not this season, but decades ago). Just because every other designer has also ripped off her design doesn't mean it is not an adventures in copyright.

posted by spendthrift

Jan 16, 2008 6:02PM

seriously, this is stretching it a bit. Since when does DVF own leopard. This whole adventures in copywriting thing is getting a little tired. Unless of course you tell me that I can find the Cavalli lace inset dress at Urban for $58....

posted by Jac

Jan 16, 2008 8:23PM

Is there a reason people comment anonymously? Like is fashionista going to ruin their life and name in New York? I'm seriously asking because I'm not a part of the culture there...

posted by Stef Alicia

Jan 16, 2008 9:57PM

the swimsuit you had up originally definitely didn't do the finding any justice. good job on finding the original dvf dress because there were a lot of doubters in the audience.

posted by guest

Jan 16, 2008 11:03PM

I think it's very Cavalli

posted by LisaJay

Jan 26, 2008 8:09AM

If I was on the jury, I'd definitely vote copyright infringement. The original is not just a leopard print, it is a stylized, oversize leopard print--as is the Target version.

Also, the original has a two-tone background, as does the Target version. The pattern similarity is even more striking on a sleeveless version of the DVF dress with the same neckline, as shown here: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2099/2219936973_19e09d70fa_o.jpg

Cavalli has a leopardskin print, but the pattern is nothing like the stylized, oversize DVF version, which is quite distinctive.