Last July Kim Kardashian’s lawyers filed a suit against Old Navy for using a model in ads, named Melissa Molinaro, who looked an awful lot like Kimmy. (Molinaro was also dating Reggie Bush at the time, a former Kardashian flame. Drama.) At the time the suit was filed, it was expected that Kardashian’s legal team Read more →
This is a strange one that we’re still having trouble wrapping our heads around: Victoria’s Secret is being accused of misleading customers and producing cheaper “knockoffs” of its own legwear. Zephyrs, which was a hosiery supplier to the lingerie giant, alleges that Victoria’s Secret is still using images of Zephyrs-produced hosiery on its packaging, but Read more →
Lululemon is not all “ohm” all the time. The brand is getting litigious with some heavy hitters in the fashion world–namely, Calvin Klein. The Canadian brand, known for their pricey yoga gear, filed suit in Delaware on August 13, accusing Calvin Klein and their manufacturer G-III Apparel of infringing on three patents on designs of Read more →
Among the many problems plaguing the modeling industry is the fact that models have no way to recoup lost wages if a client is unwilling or unable to pay. Fortunately, the Model Alliance and Freelancers Union are working together to change that.
According to an announcement posted on Model Alliance’s site, the two organizations are working together to help pass the Freelancer Payment Protection Act, a proposed law that will help protect models and other freelancers in New York from deadbeat clients as well as protect models from wage theft by their agencies.
Since our Adventures in Copyright feature began five years ago, we’d venture to guess knock offs of designer goods have become even more common. And just like there isn’t yet legislation preventing 14-year-olds from walking in runway shows, there isn’t really legislation keeping designers from copying each other, but that doesn’t mean the CFDA won’t do their best to see that it doesn’t happen.
Back in 2010, we learned about a proposed new bill that would offer more protection to designers. Called the Innovative Design Protection and Piracy Prevention Act, it was supported by the CFDA, but not always by the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA), who represent manufacturers (who may be manufacturing some of those knock-offs). However, according to WWD, the two groups have been collaborating over the past five years on finding ways to prevent design piracy even though a bill has not yet passed.
In news that is really only surprising because it’s never happened before, a major fashion magazine is getting sued by one of its former interns.
According to the New York Times, Xuedan Wang interned at Harper’s Bazaar from August 2010 through December 2011 for 40-55 hours per week and today filed a lawsuit against Hearst (the fashion glossy’s publisher) accusing them of violating state and federal wage and hour laws by not paying her when she was doing the work of a paid employee.
It’s been a little over a year since apparel manufacturer L.A. Triumph slapped Madonna with a lawsuit, claiming that her “Material Girl” line for Macy’s threatens their own “Material Girl” juniors clothing line that they have been selling since 1997. We thought it sounded crazy, considering the fact that Madonna invented “Material Girl,” the song (well, writers did, but you know what we mean), in 1984.
However, we learned last August that L.A. Triumph actually had a leg to stand on, because while Madonna may have the copyright to the name of the song, she doesn’t have the trademark, since she hadn’t yet sold any products bearing the name (several missed opportunities there if you ask us!)
Madonna, understandably, was hoping they didn’t–she requested that the court throw out the lawsuit, which the judge has denied.
According to a lawsuit filed today in Los Angeles, Zooey Deschanel is suing Steve Madden for $2 million. Here’s why:
According to the lawsuit, in August 2010 Deschanel’s agent at CAA and Steve Madden made a binding, oral agreement stating that the starlet would be paid $2 million by the company to front a line of shoes, tentatively called “Zooey’s Shoes and Accessories.” She was told that she would be paid regardless of whether or not the items were actually produced, and that the payment would cover 13 days of work, including a photo shoot for an ad as well as press appearances.
A few weeks later, Steve Madden came back to the Deschanel camp, complaining that one retailer in particular was not keen on the collaboration, which meant they’d have to reduce the fee to $1.5 million. Deschanel’s agent agreed to the new fee. During this time, the actress refrained from entering into any similar contracts, as that was part of the oral agreement.
Except in October 2010, Steve Madden went back to Zooey’s agent and said that the deal was kaputt.
