Fashion Copyright Article For Fashiontribes

Hurray!  My fashion copyright article for Fashiontribes is finally live.  Read the article here; I only skimmed it, but it looks like Sandra did a great job editing. 

That said, the piece offers a simple take of a complicated issue, and I'd like introduce a few more topics they didn't have space for, as well as clarify a few points.   Frankly, I'm not happy with the article (I know that seems to contradict the previous paragraph, but it doesn't), so I'll try to write a blog version of the original, with more opinion and more information.

Comments

[Sandra]

Wow! You beat me to it Betty! Great piece.

[Stephanie]

Whenever I try to click the link to the article, I get sent to some log in page for MOLI. :(

[Stephanie]

That article was really good, Betty. Thanks for reposting it.

I saw an article recently that interviewed DVF about this same issue. That article left me feeling a little bitter towards some of these designers. It seemed to me that they were whining just a little too much about being knocked-off.

On the one hand, yes it's terrible that the fake luxury goods market, for instance, is exploiting children and poor people over in China and helps fund illegal activites. On the other hand, most average Janes can in no way EVER afford a $10,000 handbag from Marc Jacobs. Do they think that if they copyright their designs that we will all be "forced" to buy their "original" items. Or, that because we can't afford their designs that we aren't worthy of being fashionable? I'm using extreme examples here. But, from down here where us sensible, budget conscious gals live that's what it appears they are saying.

Besides, most of these "original" clothing designs I've seen in magazine advertisements and articles seem to mimick each other. Or most often now days, they're ripping off vintage fashion designs from the 50s, 60s, 70s, and early 80s. I know this because I've been paying very close attention to what the trends are for my vintage clothing business.

It just seems really sad and pretentious for some of these wealthy, popular designers to stand up and tout how original they are when THEY are influenced by other designers, pop culture, and what girls are wearing on the streets. No one is truly original unless you live in a box and have no influences at all.

Personally, I don't think that HR-5055 will pass. But, then again, there are some deep pockets out there in the fashion world. :)

Again, great article, Betty.

[Sandra]

Stephanie is absolutely correct. Designers are inspired by vintage every season. Some take one key design element, while others do a complete reproduction it seems. I loved Marc Jacobs collection for Fall, but that's because I love vintage.

I'm actually very pleased that they keep vintage inspirations on the minds of the mainstream consumer, because it brings customers to mine and other's vintage sites.

However, back to the issue at hand, I am always very careful about handbags or clothing I buy at lower end stores because I don't like buying knock offs. I will often wear outfits that I put together that are inspired by say Chanel, but if it were a flat out copy, like the DVF yellow dress everyone is talking about, I wouldn't buy.

But as Stephanie so eloquently stated, how do designers expect consumers to pay such high prices for items that are made in China? C'mon Diane!

I also don't think this law will pass, but it will be very interesting to see what will come of it.

[Kathleen]

Hi, I also can't access this article. Do you have another direct link?

FWIW, I wrote an article recently (Fashion copyright: the death of us all) about how this proposed legislation will eliminate all the potential designers the law purports to protect. It'll be impossible to find contractors (I'm one) due to the liability. Clothing prices will increase. Like it or not, you'll have to buy clothes from companies who are financially well off enough to be first in line at the copyright office, and who have shoddy human rights records or go without.

[Betty]

Hi Kathleen,

Here's the original Fashiontribes article:

http://shesabetty.typepad.com/shes_a_betty_single_girl_/2007/04/all_about_hr_50.html

I wrote it back when the bill was called H.R.5055, and the article's a "for dummies" take on the issue. I also made an error about the current legality of design knock-offs (corrected below):

http://shesabetty.typepad.com/shes_a_betty_single_girl_/2007/04/why_diane_von_f.html

Lastly, just for fun, here are transcripts for the legislative hearing on H.R. 5055:
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings.aspx?ID=152

BTW, I enjoyed your post--it's always interesting to hear the production side of things. Two things to consider--the bill only extends copyright to designs not already in the public domain (so I don't think a designer could copyright the generic hoodie, for example), and only protects designs for a period of three years (after which the designs enter the public domain). Even so, I agree with you that the bill is unnecessary and bad for business.