Diane von Furstenberg Sues Forever 21

[softgrey]

maybe the difference is teh season........

i checked it out and the chloe dress actually came first---2005

whereas teh
dVF dress (which it woudl seem SHE copied from chloe!---....)
is THIS season-selling at teh same time adn teh forever 21 knockoffs---

so in fact-dVF WOULD be losing sales if people opted to buy the cheaper version rather than hers...

and forever 21 really SHOULD have at least changed the colour or something!...it's beyond a knock off or an inspiration...it is a blatant FAKE!...
not unlike the fake fendis on the street...

and def not legal...

this is happenening more and more lately...
which i thhink is really good---
things have been looking too much the same everywhere you go you see the same same same....

hoping this will force some originality out of some of these retailers!!!


...

 

[madblonde]

I graduated with a degree in Fashion Product Development. There is a legal difference between a knock-off and a copy. A designer can not sue another designer, retailer, brand, etc., if they change at least five details (fabric, hem-length, color, button placement, pretty much anything that distinguishes it from the original). Then it is considered a knock-off inspired by the original. If less than five details are changed then it is considered a copy and the original designer has the right to sue.

Alot of designers are doing lower priced lines so they can knock off their own stuff before other brands get to it. If DVF wins this case, were are going to see a slew of lawsuits, this has been a big issue recently in the fashion industry with more desiners starting to complain about how quickly the stuff makes it into F21 and other stores, sometimes before the real designer pieces have even hit the stores.

 

[Scott]

it's nice to see designers finally taking a stand for their work and not allowing these people to rip them off. if anything is ultimately gained from this it's shedding an even clearer light on an scathing epidemic not only in high-street shops but i wish more designers would take on some of the bigger wallets in the industry itself.

 

[jennifer~]

I graduated with a degree in Fashion Product Development. There is a legal difference between a knock-off and a copy. A designer can not sue another designer, retailer, brand, etc., if they change at least five details (fabric, hem-length, color, button placement, pretty much anything that distinguishes it from the original). Then it is considered a knock-off inspired by the original. If less than five details are changed then it is considered a copy and the original designer has the right to sue.

Out of curiousity, does the 'look' of a material have any bearing over the actual fabric constitution? It would be pretty easy to alter the latter by adding a little more acrylic in place of wool, for example (worst-case scenario, but you'll understand), which is likely to happen anyway when a retailer cuts corners. Fake leather in place of real also raises that question, among other examples...

 

[Meg]

No you do not have to trademark or patent anything for it to be your right to whoever asked it. There are intellectual property issues here as well i would imagine and since it was well noted that dvf came out with the dress first (it was produced before this season) and they can prove that reasonably they are copying the dress, they shouldn't have a problem. It'll probably settle outside of court i would imagine.

It doesn't matter the store anymore really whether or not shoppers are informed. People shop everywhere. When I was at Aritzia (a somewhat upscale sporty boutique in Canada) i was wearing a DvF dress over jeans and the SA there said to me, oh i like you're dress, where did you get it and i said oh it's by Diane von Furstenburg and she gave me the most blank look ever. I was like haha, oh well.

 

[misssakura]

The cola thing though, I'm pretty sure you can't use the same recipe, you have to use different proportions of the ingredients, and you definitely can't use the same can.

Well only 4 people in the world know the secret recipe to coca cola...and they can keep it because it's gross aha..

The packaging is protected by copyright, the copyright transferred over from the design company to coca cola when they signed off the license. So yes of course nobody could copy that. And like I said it's impossible to copy the exact ingredients of coca cola but anyway getting off topic...

I thought the DVF dress was yellow whereas forever21 was black and white?

 

[mellowdrama]

I'd think Barry Diller could stamp his mighty feet and close all the sweatshops in China.

 

[SevenWeeksLater]

Sakura-the Chloe dress is black and white, both the F21 and DvF dresses are yellow
I checked out the f21 web site and I didnt see it anywhere, they must've been ordered to take it down

 

[Beautiful Stranger]

"Well, there's imitation and then there's copying, that F21 dress is the EXACT same dress. I don't get to copy the coke recipe, and put it in a coke can that says "Koke" on it, why should F21 get to make a DVF dress and put a tag in it that says F21? Besides, if these stores weren't so busy copying designer clothes, maybe they could hire one of the many unemployed graduates of fashion design"

I totally agree with this. DVF and her designteam is literally designing FOR Forever 21, unpaid.

 

[Julz]

What about Allen Schwartz who makes copies of the Oscar red carpet dresses, does he ever get sued by the designers?

 

[fashionicon]

"Well, there's imitation and then there's copying, that F21 dress is the EXACT same dress. I don't get to copy the coke recipe, and put it in a coke can that says "Koke" on it, why should F21 get to make a DVF dress and put a tag in it that says F21? Besides, if these stores weren't so busy copying designer clothes, maybe they could hire one of the many unemployed graduates of fashion design"

I highly doubt the material used in the DVF dress and the Forever21 dress is the same, or of the same quality. If so, than that's it, I'm only shopping at Forever21.

You can buy the same pair of basic black Marc Jacobs slacks, that you can buy, in different brands, at Macy's, Target, and even Wal-Mart. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is the brand name. DVF is a high end, well-known brand name, whereas Forever21 is just a retail store that sells cheap clothes that are really cute.

 

[shopdiary]

Wow, I didn't know this was being discussed here. I noticed the knock off before the lawsuit was announced and posted about it on my blog. For those of you who asked about a photo of the Forever 21 "Sabrina" dress, here it is on the right, with the DVF Cerisier on the left. It was taken down from the F21 site last week as part of the litigation.

There is also another dress in question. The DVF Aubrey on the left, and the F21 Pinecone on the right.

Here's an article from WWD (March 28, 2007

By Liza Casabona, WWD
Diane von Furstenberg continues to take the protection of her intellectual property very seriously.

Diane von Furstenberg Studio filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Forever 21 Retail Inc. late last week in Manhattan federal court. According to legal documents obtained Tuesday, the company alleged Forever 21 has sold dresses that infringe on its Cerisier and Aubrey designs.

“Without authorization or license from DVF, Forever 21 has produced and is marketing, advertising, distributing, offering for sale and selling dresses nearly identical to DVF’s Cerisier and Aubrey dresses that bear print designs identical to the DVF copyrights,” according to legal papers. The complaint goes on to allege that Forever 21’s merchandise copied the exact scale and color for each design and that the infringement was willful.
Forever 21 did not return requests for comment by press time.
The Cerisier dress design, part of the company’s holiday collection shown in October, consists of two print designs owned by DVF Studio called the “small dentelle” and “flower lace border” designs. The Aubrey dress was first shown in the DVF spring 2006 fashion show in September 2005, according to court papers. The Aubrey dress has a print design on it called “mimosa,” which is also owned exclusively by DVF.
The complaint contains allegations of copyright infringement, federal and state unfair competition, false designation of origin and unlawful deceptive acts. DVF asked the court to require Forever 21 to recall and remove from commercial distribution or display any items that infringe on its copyrights as well as any promotional materials related to those goods. The complaint also asked for unspecified financial damages.
Von Furstenberg herself spoke recently with WWD about the implementation of a new program at DVF aimed at protecting the brand’s intellectual property. The firm established a three-year strategy to address counterfeiting and intellectual property issues. The company is working with lawyer Harley Lewin, of Greenberg Traurig, on the program. In recent months, the company has quietly filed a handful of lawsuits in jurisdictions all over the country, including California, New York, Georgia, Florida and Virginia.
Forever 21 has found itself the defendant in copyright litigation over fabric before. In January, the company was sued for allegedly infringing on a fabric copyright owned by M.M.P. Inc., which does business as Fabric & Fabric. The privately held company currently operates more than 300 Forever 21 stores and approximately 100 Gadzooks stores nationwide.

Here's a discussion at Counterfeit Chic:

But since dresses aren't subject to copyright protection, on what grounds does the designer make her claims? The solution is in the details...of the fabric. While the Copyright Office does not accept registrations for garments, it does register textile patterns. In the case of the Cerisier dress, DVF holds not one but two copyrights, the first for the "Flower Lace Border" design and the second for the "Small Dentelle" design. Together, they add up to a substantial claim for protection. For good measure, the complaint also throws in federal and state unfair competition claims.
If these were little black dresses, this lawsuit would never have been filed. The same goes for ordinary polka dots, gingham checks, or any other fabric design in the public domain -- even if the dress design had been extremely complex and original. But ever since U.S. courts finally realized that the distinction between ink on paper and dye on fabric was untenable, textile patterns have been part of the subject matter of copyright.​

More here.​

 

[Fashion Puss]

The label I used to work for once got taken to court for this sort of thing. In court you have to provide patterns for comparison and fabric specs. Its done down to the finest detail to prove it.

Still, a high street brand ripping of a higher end label; not the most shocking thing I've heard all day. Plagiarism is rife in the rag trade. I'm not saying that makes it acceptable, because its not. It frustrates me with high street brands (I've worked on fabrics for a few now) that designers can't just do what they were trained to and *design*

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

Hmmmm...wow.

Forever 21 is so cheap, I can understand why they're so mad. lol

 

[so_pink]

What about Allen Schwartz who makes copies of the Oscar red carpet dresses, does he ever get sued by the designers?

and he's always on et or access hollywood showing cameras how he makes em!!!

what about payless? h&m?
DVF is just being GREEEEEEDYYYYYYYYY
more and more people are becoming fashion conscious these days.. as someone here stated, this should be a form of flattery. most of america cannot afford her $300+ dresses...thats 2 paychecks for me as a struggling student. and...only a small percentage know these so called "copies" resemble designer pieces..for one thing the quality is not even comparable..and dvf..im sorry to say...she should just sell her stuff about 50% cheaper and make it into like banana republic chain. the wrap dress aint easy to make..her prints are all in the fabric and her designs are just a little on the simple side. theres nothing innovative except for that fact she is one of the first woman designers to launch and of course the infamous wrap dress that I DONT SEE women wearing. if she wants money, thats the way to go...but if she wants her pride, reputation as high class socialite, serving to only the first class, then this suit will do her good untill she loses.. =p

 

[Meg]

I for one think dvf is pretty reasonably priced. She's stayed consistant with her pricing and hasn't continued to increase her prices like other designers mentioned in the thread. Why should H&M and F21 and others get all the glory? Maybe they should be paying their design team more and getting more original pieces instead of copying others. I think someone mentioned (un)fair competition laws which is interesting...

 

[Fashion Puss]

and he's always on et or access hollywood showing cameras how he makes em!!!

what about payless? h&m?
DVF is just being GREEEEEEDYYYYYYYYY
more and more people are becoming fashion conscious these days.. as someone here stated, this should be a form of flattery. most of america cannot afford her $300+ dresses...thats 2 paychecks for me as a struggling student. and...only a small percentage know these so called "copies" resemble designer pieces..for one thing the quality is not even comparable..and dvf..im sorry to say...she should just sell her stuff about 50% cheaper and make it into like banana republic chain. the wrap dress aint easy to make..her prints are all in the fabric and her designs are just a little on the simple side. theres nothing innovative except for that fact she is one of the first woman designers to launch and of course the infamous wrap dress that I DONT SEE women wearing. if she wants money, thats the way to go...but if she wants her pride, reputation as high class socialite, serving to only the first class, then this suit will do her good untill she loses.. =p

I think there are a number of flaws in the above.

First, why should she sell her stuff cheaper? Why? She most likely sources from somewhere other than China. She most likely has all of the following: a fabric sourcer, a fabric technologist (to ensure that the fabric meets standards i.e. not fall apart, fade or wash out the colour), someone who solely works on prints (meaning that they are designing a print from scratch, not like a lot of other retailer that will buy a print straight as the hanger or stock direct from an agent or mill), a competant patter cutter and more importantly a good grader which will ensure that the garment is a good fit to within her customer spec across all sizes. All of this combined, plus the marketing and publicity plus the garment going to a reputable garment manufacturer that uses decent staff and not "small hands"

All of the above goes into her dresses which is why one of her dresses is worth $300. Why should she make it cheaper and more accessible? If I could afford it it would be nice to have something that was made in a 500 unit quanity, rather than 50,000 quantities that H&M make. Not that there is anything wrong with that. But H&M don't cost in all of the above which is why DVF can run a dress at a higher price bracket.

The reason DVF is suing is not because she is greedy, it because if she has spent the time and money to ensure the garment is the best she can produce, and then someone else comes and copies it stitch for stitch, well even I would be annoyed at that. Essentially, she has done all the hard work and then someone else has come in to ride it off.

Her designs may be on the simple side, but when did you last go an actually look closely at one of her garments? The manufacture, the design, the colour, the cut...etc? You say that as a struggling student you can't afford her things and she should cut her prices in half and become Banana Repulic. Sure not everyone can afford her garments, neither can I, but honestly I think the fundamentals of socialism are in the wrong place regarding a label like DVF.

 

[igotgoodjeans]

ive read several interviews in which DVF outlines her position on this whole issue and its a worthwhile cause pursuing especially for young designers who are just starting out and seeing their hard work going down the drain because of knockoffs that get turned around so quickly nowadays.

 

[fashionicon]

ive read several interviews in which DVF outlines her position on this whole issue and its a worthwhile cause pursuing especially for young designers who are just starting out and seeing their hard work going down the drain because of knockoffs that get turned around so quickly nowadays.

True, but no offense, and I'm an aspiring young designer myself, but that's just a simple shift dress. That can be made in like half an hour, if that. They picked out fabric, got their basic shift pattern out, slapped DVF on it, and sold it for big bucks.

You don't see F21 knocking off Marc Jacobs,McQueen, etc, etc, etc.

I agree with an above poster, maybe this will get these designers to think outside the box when designing for top names.

 

[pinkpalm]

I know a salesgirl at Neimans who wears nothing but the Forever 21 DVF knockoffs...and tells her clents they are dvf and usually winds up selling something similar at neimans to them.

Oh and F21 did knockoff anna sui, who is not very big at all.