Design Piracy Prohibition Act: the CFDA, knockoffs (the end?), effects on consumers

Discussion in 'Shop Till You Drop' started by mie, Jun 8, 2009.

View Users: View Users
  1. mie

    mie Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    Anyone else heard about this?


    According to the CFDA:

    The following excerpts are from fashion-incubator.com. The full posts, if you want to read more, are here:

    Proposed law to destroy 90% of design businesses

    Fashion copyright: the death of us all


    Effects on consumers:

     
  2. designerleather

    designerleather New Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is no good way to address this.

    On one hand many of my friends are getting killed because their are Pakistani companies take what is an $800 or $1200 item, knock it off and flood the internet with in some cases $69 rip-offs. These leeches are even bold enough to use THEIR copyrighted images in their websites...

    Sadly, image copyright violation enforcement has been the most effective tool today.

    Their response? Hidden or private websites. They now wholesale their privacy and you have to apply to get to the buying website. I am currently a "mole" and have been documenting and creating PDFs for another round of lawsuits against the scum.

    On the other hand, there is so much copying, something needs to be done... So where is the balance? I have been around the industry to know that so much is copied and borrowed.

    My mom is a vintage textile dealer (mainly 17th century, give or take 75 years) and at shows like Brimfield, etc., you will see buyers for the designers buying garments either for new designs, or for ideas about fabrics and patterns.

    It is a very tough balance
     
  3. Scott

    Scott Stitch:the Hand

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Messages:
    12,969
    Likes Received:
    0
    but what about corporate designers doing it to other designers? oh,they never want to admit or stand up against that :rolleyes:
     
  4. ofewne datwiste

    ofewne datwiste New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2009
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually Diane Von Furstenburg was recently pointed out doing this. She dropped the item and blamed her staff.
     
  5. kathleen fasanel

    kathleen fasanel New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0
    I urge you to write your legislators. This widget will automatically email your representatives. In addition, please sign the independent designer's petition. Independents are opposed to this. Socialite designers like DVF are not independents. You're not an independent if you generate multi-millions in sales and have the power to muzzle the US press.

    US firms have been copying foreign designers for over 100 years. This law will not protect them so it doesn't seem fair that US designers expect consideration they will not give themselves. Fair is fair. Nathalie Atkinson, who broke the story about DVF stealing Mercy's design, has a follow up story (I'm quoted). She wrote about two more independent Canadian designers in the Financial Post who had their designs stolen by Gap and Free People. The ugly truth is, the US press is not writing about the DVF story, I guess because of all the money she spends on advertising. So much for being an "independent".

    None of the independent designers I know have the money to advertise, pay $200+ to register each design, thousands of dollars to pay an attorney to search the design database, or the money to sue someone like Gap or DVF if they do get knocked off. If DVF has the financial pull to keep the US fashion press muzzled, who do you think is going to win in a lawsuit? It's whoever has the most money. If DVF couldn't successfully sue Forever 21, what chance do my designers have? NONE! The problem is, DVF's law would keep them from entering the business in the first place. That's a great way to kill your competition, just keep them out to begin with. With less competition, consumers are really screwed. They'll have to pay the $800 for the DVF design, rather than $250 for what it cost to buy the ORIGINAL Mercy design.

    And sizes? Ha! Socialite designers like DVF don't cut anything larger than a size 12. The average US resident wears a size 14, what are they going to wear? Besides, the unemployment rate is now nearly 10%, how can afford to wear expensive designer fashions? I can't.

    Worst of all, this will not protect US jobs during the worst recession in decades. The socialite designers who want this law passed, produce their lines off shore. Independent designers produce their lines in the US, hiring US workers. If this law passes, a lot of people will be put out of work, the exact opposite of what DVF claims.

    You know, in the beginning, I thought this was a great law. I thought "any little bit helps" but it doesn't. It more than doubles their production costs and in this tough economy, they are struggling enough as it is. I am a pattern maker, I run the most popular website on the internet for independent fashion designers. I've been working with independents for nearly 15 years so I think I'd know their business. If their design isn't registered, I can't do their work. I can't afford to get sued. If people like me can't make their patterns or sew their products, it's not going to get done. I guess the independent designers of the world can look forward to a new career at Wal-mart or at best, as sales people at DVF. That'll leave a mark.
     
  6. designerleather

    designerleather New Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    The other part that is really not covered here is the piracy that takes place in far off countries. Have you ever been a Canadian or US company and tried to sue a Chinese or Pakistani company? Even if you have things REGISTERED, it is a hard, long and expensive process.

    But I do agree with the above poster. The current bill stifles creativity and provides an unfair advantage to the multi-national conglomerates.
     
  7. Milada

    Milada New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    533
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm reminded of the "Outfit Lookalikes" thread. As has been mentioned, high-end designers do it themselves, sometimes by coincidence, because when it comes to minimalism or common patterns, it's bound to happen. Other times their probably is some sneaky staff member up to no good. But really, HOW are they going to determine if something breaches a copyright or not? Is Miuccia Prada going to copyright the sweetheart neckline? Really, I can't see this passing because it's too messy and poorly thought-out.

    Completely false, in my opinion. Everyone appreciates the original and a knock-off never bears the same luxurious connotation of wearing an actual pair of Louboutins or a Chanel 2.55. Those are still everyone's ultimate goals (maybe insert your own brands there, I just picked some iconic items).

    P.S., that Diane von Furstenburg story and the lack of reporting is fascinating. Independent indeed. This law will discriminate against the upcoming, especially if a more established design conglomerate feels the heat of competition.
     
  8. designerleather

    designerleather New Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    I will disagree with you here. This type of thing is VERY hard to measure but the classification comes down into two categories... Those that want the status of the label, and those that want the look. Quality does come into being, but that is also not to say that a cheaper item does not have the same quality. Price sometimes is merely a huge factor of label and not of superior quality.

    When you look at Louis Vuitton, one of the reasons the signature LV logoed leather came about was the designs were being copied, imitated and that was a way for Louis Vuitton to create and promote their image, as well as make a statement about their quality.

    There will always be in this segment, those who never will, or simply cannot afford the item in question, but to argue that knock-offs do not impact companies, then I think that is off just slightly. Part of fashion, especially when it comes to the "stars" and the "to-be-scene" crowd is all about appearance, and having flocks of knock-offs flooding the streets dillutes this image as well as lessens the brand and desireablity.

    Fashion is hard to measure, but knock offs do steal a fair amount of sales. If it was not a big deal, why do companies like Chanel and others spend MILLIONS prowling eBay and other venues to shut down these knock-offs?
     
  9. Milada

    Milada New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    533
    Likes Received:
    0
    My argument was that knock-offs don't value the prestige of the original, not that they don't impact companies.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"