« Mid-Day Snack

Adventures in Copyright Jun 30, 2009 @ 11:34am

Adventures in Copyright: Leaves from the Same Tree

A reader just sent us an email with the subject line: “Copyright Copycat F21 at it again.”

Boy, was she right.

Usually, in an Adventures in Copyright item, we’ll list one or two things that the copiers did to make it a little less obvious that they’re taking someone else’s design, but, well…if there’s some glaring difference we’re missing, kindly let us know.

The best we’ve got is that Forever 21 has put their dress on a model, and the BCBG is on a mannequin.

And we believe that’s what one would call “blatant”.

—AMANDA JEAN BOYLE

« Mid-Day Snack

Fashionista Main

Taking the Temperature »

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 11:48AM

I don't really know if you can consider something like this a copyright infringement. Mass-produced designers like BCBG and Forever21 buy a lot of their material from the same producers. Furthermore, I find nothing revolutionary about a cap-sleeve dress.

Years ago when DVF sued Forever21 over the infamous yellow, silk dress knock-off, I thought it was total B.S. Sure, they ripped off the style (which, again, was nothing revolutionary), but the fabric was IDENTICAL. I had the original dress and a friend of mine had the F21 version. We could not tell our dresses apart.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 11:50AM

additionally, bcbg copy-catted those fantastic marni patent heels from this season. couldn't find a marni image fast enough, but here are the bcbg ones:
http://img.shopstyle.com/xim/fd/ee/fdee8f945f0c384da2939578d7728427.jpg

ah, the tangled, fashionable web we weave....

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 11:52AM

come to think of it, those shoes would actually look pretty cute with that dress....but i digress.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 11:54AM

gust #1, most of the time if you are that big of a company, you are making your own prints...you should hope, otherwise, everyone in the world would rip you off...

but bcbg rips others all the time, so serves them right.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 12:24PM

#4: Not true. Yes, many large companies design their own textiles, but many (a VAST majority...trust me, I work in the textile industry) also buy from textile manufacturers.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 12:30PM

I never understand your "adventures in copyright" posts. As someone who works for a large company (and many others as well) as a designer, 90% of the garments that are being produced are "inspired" by something else. I find it ridiculous that you think its copyright "infringement" Find me an original idea in fashion...I would be surprised, at least in a mass produced environment, such as BCBG or whomever else that size and/or magnitude, because it doesn't exist.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 12:58PM

I'm going to have to agree with Amanda on this one.

There are several things F21 could do to not make it an exact copy, but they didn't.

Make it a maxi or something. These dresses are identical. Nothing inspiring about it.

On the other hand, BCBG frequently copies themselves, so they should not complain.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 1:02PM

#7,
Agreed. I definitely wasn't defending F21. However, they are only defined by their market. Unfortuantely.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 1:03PM

Sorry for the double post. Eek!

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 1:22PM

F21's has no pleat in the front. probably would have cost them a dollar more.
sad.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 1:35PM

Makes no difference. Both are being made in China for nothing , one however costs 200 dollars and the other 20.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 3:18PM

I think it looks better without the pleat, to be honest. I hate random prego pleats.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 6:20PM

If I can buy the dress at F21 for $20 as opposed to BCBG for $100, I will. Serves them right for overpricing their clothes that are probably manufactured down the street from F21's factory in China.

posted by guest

Jun 30, 2009 8:08PM

Can't get a copyright for a garment. And I'm not sure that's really such a bad thing. The fashion industry is doing fine without the stifling protection of copyrights. It works perfectly--someone with more cash can get the same dress in silk, someone with less money can get the same look but in rayon.

To me, fashion is often more compelling than other areas of visual art that do get copyright protection--pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works.

posted by Signature9

Jun 30, 2009 8:24PM

Agree with #5. I remember buying a Theory dress at Neiman Marcus, then seeing the exact same dress with a different label at a smaller chain store. I think the difference in price was $50 or less, but there's a very good reason there aren't copyrights for fashion designs

http://www.signature9.com

posted by my fall collection

Jul 01, 2009 3:45AM

I haven't looked at Fashionista in a couple of weeks (months?) but I see that I've missed nothing.

Look dudes, it IS neat when you guys pick out a higher end and a lower end "inspired by" wardrobe couplet. Heck, even if they are both at the same price point, it's kind of neat.

But don't YOU even get tired of framing it in your "shaming" voice? It's SO unattractive and unamusing and uninformative.

Can you just, like, be a girl who likes clothes, and examine the details, the fabric, the print, the feel, the fit, and then give us your cute little take on whether you'd advise getting the $$$ one or the $ one? And then everyone will comment about which one they'd get.

And if someone comes in all "shame shame for infringing apparel" then let the commenters cause their own little drama.

But PLEASE STOP FRAMING THESE POSTS IN THIS WAY!

Change it up, yeah? It's not fun anymore.