adristar's Profile
Entry: Jun 26, 2008 @ 2:03pm
posted by adristar
Jun 26, 2008 9:08PM
um did anyone notice the
"i live to be model-thin"?
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Channeling Chanel
posted by adristar
Oct 21, 2008 12:16PM
imitation will ALWAYS exist. although copycatting may be as intellectually degraded as this blog series, it is unavoidable and not easy to regulate. i would argue, in fact, that it shouldn't be regulated. if it is reasonable to regulate a particular combination of design elements, or even just a particular combination of design elements that somewhat resembles a previously existing particular combination of design elements, where can the line be drawn? perhaps chanel should be able to copyright any small, fitted, black dresses.
i think the ultimate point here is that it is up to the consumer to make an educated decision. it is wrong for a copycat design to parade AS the brand it is imitating (for example, logo imitation, such as the canal street knockoffs that actually say "louis vuitton", etc), however imitation will continue to exist no matter how many times this blog points it out.
although it may seem tacky, it's not morally wrong. it is also impossible to figure out who/what is the ORIGINAL version. i think you guys also have a point to make, and your point is valid, however these posts don't serve to defend the craftmanship and artistic quality of well-made clothes. they just make glaringly obvious your preference not for originality of design, but for expensive, status-symbol labels, and your willingness to defend their precedence til the end. you guys remind me of british royal family enthusiasts who make scrapbooks and shrines and memorize every small detail, and criticize all opposition, merely because you want a taste of this arbitrary "royalty", which in reality is but an illusion.
Entry: Spotted: A Fake
posted by adristar
Oct 23, 2008 11:48AM
#14: what ARE the important issues, if not the day-to-day lifestyles of the candidates, and more importantly, her awareness of her country's laws??? whether or not the bag is real, it implies (as does the criticisms of her $150 000 wardrobe) that she is not the person her campaign is advertising her to be, or at least, that she is weak enough to allow the republican stylists to change her without palin's being fully aware of the direction in which she is being changed. this necessitates questions about palin's dedication, and capability as VP. i do, however, agree that this photo is out of context and therefore shouldn't reflect palin the way that a photo of herself carrying the bag would.
#22 "Please, Fashionista, stay the hell out of politics. We don't care if you love Obama or hate Palin, because the only reason you love Obama is not because you have half a mind to understand what's going on in the debates, but because Thakoon and Andre Leon Tally love him, too! Like, OMFG!!!"
that is the most ignorant thing i have ever read.
Entry: Spotted: A Fake
posted by adristar
Oct 23, 2008 11:48AM
#22 "Please, Fashionista, stay the hell out of politics. We don't care if you love Obama or hate Palin, because the only reason you love Obama is not because you have half a mind to understand what's going on in the debates, but because Thakoon and Andre Leon Tally love him, too! Like, OMFG!!!"
that is the most ignorant thing i have ever read.
Entry: Lively Does Indeed Land W Cover
posted by adristar
Nov 11, 2008 3:14PM
http://laineygossip.com/Blake_Lively_looks_deformed_in_W_Magazine.aspx?IsMicro=0
Entry: Nov 19, 2008 @ 3:05pm
posted by adristar
Nov 19, 2008 4:45PM
"ugly model, she looks old"
do you hear yourself?
Entry: Carine for Anna? Mon Dieu!
posted by adristar
Dec 02, 2008 4:40PM
isn't this the plot of "the devil wears prada"?
Entry: Mid-Day Snack
posted by adristar
Apr 26, 2009 6:08PM
A quotation from the article, which I think applies directly to your 'Adventures in Copyright' ethic: "...Or maybe for all their protesting, American fashion brands think intellectual property applies only to major, established designers with international profile. I mean, why else would Marc Jacobs have similarly appropriated the design of an obscure vintage souvenir scarf from Linsell, Sweden, figuring nobody would notice?"
Considering the overwhelming majority of your accusations are in the defense of upscale labels, I think you guys should take a long, hard look at what your motives truly are, and what you're truly protecting. And maybe do a some background reading on the philosophy of intellectual copyright.
Entry: Mid-Day Snack
posted by adristar
May 06, 2009 3:19PM
oh come on guys, admit that you're just trained by society to dislike any type of physical display of fat people.
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Roses Are Blue, Violent Are You
posted by adristar
May 30, 2009 12:08AM
LOL.
instead of just sending a snarky warning to readers, i wish fashionista would actually respond to their accusers! i want to hear your side! also, someone posted about how DIYs have disappeared... that's a pretty good observation, considering the whole copyright issue.
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Floral Frenzy
posted by adristar
Jun 01, 2009 6:20PM
completely agree. also, i'm pretty sure the only "exact replicas" out there are canal street handbag knockoffs, and i think we would all agree that those are an infringement of copyright.
also, so dior goes through the intensive "creative process" in order to sell a fantastic piece of jewelry for sky-high prices. maybe fred flare avoided that process, but they also avoid the $20 000+ price tag by a LONG shot (as do places like F21 and H&M). furthermore, is it really the length of a "creative process" that legitimizes an artistic creation? is a "creative process" itself necessary for legitimate art? i know this argument isn't really about the artistic merits of one vs. the other, but i think it's still an interesting question.
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Roses Are Blue, Violent Are You
posted by adristar
Jun 01, 2009 6:27PM
austinsamuel, are you calling me a filthy whore? that & your numerous grammatical errors aside, at least you're the only one who seems to grasp the fact that this is ENTIRELY about money. it's not about creativity or artistic integrity at all.
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Give(nchy) Me Studs
posted by adristar
Oct 16, 2009 3:50PM
i TOTALLY second the call for pictures of the items in every fashionista writer's closet! not only do i think it could make for a really interesting piece, but it would really put into perspective this whole AIC controversy. and points for the people who want positivity rather than negativity - sure the copycat thing is interesting and provokes debate, but how about instead of constant negativity and criticism, let's try to figure out positive solutions to the problem of dressing oneself on a budget significantly lower than that which is required to wear givenchy heels and the like.
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Give(nchy) Me Studs
posted by adristar
Oct 16, 2009 5:04PM
yikes! anger!
i do wonder where all the contempt towards readers comes from. frustration? defensiveness? either way, it's bad manners to say the least. aren't the questions posed on these comments pages legitimate? i certainly think they deserve a sincere response - why not engage in the debate and defend your posts, or at least help readers understand them?
obviously this site, like the fashion industry, is by no means a meritocracy.
i think it's safe to say that ALL clothes are influenced by OTHER clothes, and (un)fortunately, copying the pieces made by luxury designers is the bread and butter of the budget-conscious section of the industry, making it difficult to find truly "original" pieces.
i'm really, genuinely curious as to how you would recommend readers address "trends" without straying into copyright territory.
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Give(nchy) Me Studs
posted by adristar
Oct 16, 2009 5:05PM
p.s. sorry about the doublepost! don't know why that happened
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Give(nchy) Me Studs
posted by adristar
Oct 16, 2009 5:37PM
hmmm. thanks for that. i was actually quite suprised by the rationale - while i agree with pretty much every point made, i definitely do not get that impression from the AIC posts i have seen. the majority of these posts focus on major designers, that's for sure. also, i've heard a lot of whispers about these luxury goods not being as sweatshop-free as we would like to believe. what about the Chinese migrant workers in Italy working for less than minimum-wage? also, i think one of the biggest problems readers have is that the subjects of the posts are by no means "blatant knockoffs" - i think that many readers would really value it if you published your own working definition of "blatant knockoff" vs. "inspiration".
anyway i'm not calling for an end to these posts - i just wish you guys would sincerely engage in the discourse - thus allowing things to move forward - rather than just getting visibly angry and passive aggressive.
i really want to love this site!
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Corset Clone
posted by adristar
Oct 19, 2009 10:14PM
ugh.
now that sure is a blatant copy!
Entry: Adventures in Copyright: Cold Shoulder
posted by adristar
Nov 05, 2009 1:10PM
they look so similar! although the rowley one is pretty ugly, and i'd hate to think that karl is so hard up for designs he's ripping off her...! but i think they're sufficiently different that it's not copyright infringement.
Entry: Bananas in Pajamas Are Coming Down the Stairs...
posted by adristar
Jun 23, 2008 9:40PM
of course all begun by prada.....