« Mid-Day Snack
Fashionista Main
Lowman For Hogan »
Adventures in Copyright May 1, 2009 @ 12:47pm

Adventures In Copyright: A Real Gem

prada aic .jpgSometimes, you love a pair of shoes so much that regardless of their age, seeing them ripped off feels like a slap in the face.

See: Prada sandals circa 2003.

They’re one of our favorites - we loved the navy blue silk encrusted with chunky green rocks. But somehow, when this brand called Vive (we saw it in a store window) turns the navy blue into leather with contrast stitching, adds a heel and leaves off a few rocks - not because they lack the Prada label - they lose their charm.

They managed the t-strap, the perfect shade and size of stone, but they’re just not the same.

So even though it’d be tough to find the Pradas without devoting the summer to scouring consignment stores, we’ll pass on Vive’s try. Thanks though.

— CARSON GRIFFITH

Permalink |
(0) recommend this (16) Comments

Posted in Adventures in Copyright and Prada, Vive

« Mid-Day Snack
Fashionista Main
Lowman For Hogan »

Comments

avatar
1

posted by guest

May 01, 2009 1:05PM

OMG they put stones on a sandal! Prada is the only shoe to ever do that they ripped them off!!!!!!!!

You guys really need to cool it with these posts, its turning your site into a joke.

avatar
2

posted by guest

May 01, 2009 1:11PM

and yet, guest one, you're still reading. and commenting!

avatar
3

posted by guest

May 01, 2009 1:13PM

I get that you are trying to say that you prefer the prada sandals because of the details, not the label, but it seems like you are also implying that if the vive sandals were a more exact copy you would like them better. So you want them to actually rip them off, instead of just having similar style? As they are, it's a similar look, but I don't think anyone would call it a direct rip-off - there are distinct differences and zero likelihood of confusion. The t-strap sandal isn't exactly an original style, and everyone and their brother has been using those big stones as embellishment. The stones look like they are different sizes and shapes from the prada sandal, although it is hard to tell from the picture.

4

posted by shharvin

May 01, 2009 1:21PM

I can see the inspiration, but i wouldn't call these a rip off.

you guys need to realize that not all of us can afford prada sandals, so we buy cheaper things that have been directly inspired by designer looks. that's how fashion works. without that, most affordable, fast fashion stores wouldn't be able to stay in business and the industry would collapse.

i love your blog so much, but i feel like you go overboard on the adventures in copyrights sometimes. lighten up!

http://seamsandstitches.blogspot.com/

5

posted by RashomonRebel

May 01, 2009 1:28PM

Oh yea? MJ went as far as stealing someone, Paul Helbers, from another label to make it seem that his ripping off is legit. Even though Miuccia is a genius and I love her communist sensibilities, I like the Vive one better.

6

posted by bastylefilegirl

May 01, 2009 2:03PM

This is definately an inspiration shoe and not a knockoff. First off the style of the sandal itself is pretty basic and is done over and over unjeweled. It's also been 6 years I could see if they made this shoe in 2003 it would be questionable. It's 2009 and the jeweled sandal is back ( did it ever leave) and they used inspired coloring from 2003 that's all that's it!

avatar
7

posted by guest

May 01, 2009 2:26PM

So prior to prada, no one in the entire world had ever made a navy blue sandal with bright green stones on it? Highly doubtful.

Fashion designers constantly recreate looks from years before. For example, Band jackets and acid washed jeans are nothing new. How is it that when Balmain creates acid washed jeans, no one cries bloody murder about it being a rip-off of 20 other similar jeans from the 80s yet when someone this year creates something similar, they're suddenly ripping off Balmain? Is there a time contingency on these things? Within 10 years it's a rip-off but past that it's inspired and a total free for all?

avatar
8

posted by mollymc18

May 01, 2009 3:02PM

Honestly, the only similarity I see is with the color of the stones. The shoes do not look at all alike otherwise. I love this site, but when you constantly berate us with "adventures in copyright" that aren't even that close look-wise and are usually criticizing a lower-end brand, it begins to lose its appeal. I look forward to checking fashionista throughout the day for happenings in the fashion world, tips, and style suggestions, and could really do without the silly "adventures in copyright," unless it was an ACTUAL copyright case. Now that would be interesting.

9

posted by darcykins

May 01, 2009 4:17PM

i remember that prada sandal inspiring a DIY on this very site. hmm.

avatar
10

posted by guest

May 01, 2009 6:08PM

Slow fashion news day? cuz this post is completely pointless and desperate.

avatar
11

posted by guest

May 01, 2009 7:13PM

A lot of you guys are jerks! JERKS! I think these shoes are a knockoff, and if you can't see it, you're blind. Nobody said : "Prada is the first and only to make a sandal with stones!" So RELAXXXXX. Be still...

avatar
12

posted by guest

May 02, 2009 2:10AM

as santino once sang (and i believe he was quoting michael kors).... "lighten up, it's just fashion!"

avatar
13

posted by guest

May 02, 2009 5:11PM

I love the prada ones.

avatar
14

posted by guest

May 03, 2009 9:44PM

i miss carson's other posts. i loved the ones she used to do, not these barely there copyright ones. bring back the other ones, they were my favorite on the whole site!!

avatar
15

posted by guest

May 04, 2009 10:03PM

these are not knockoffs. i reapeat..not knockoffs. if that's the case then Miuccia stole this design from the Egyptians yrs ago..

16

posted by darcykins

May 05, 2009 9:54AM

guest 15, everyone knows the Miuccia steals all her designs from the Egyptians (much of which never made the history books) with help from her time machine set to 2500 B.C.E.

Post Your Comment