Diane von Furstenberg Sues Forever 21

[jennifer~]

For the record, let me state that I've finished browsing Forever21's website, and I would've been wanting to buy everything I liked at those prices, except I couldn't find anything I wanted.

 

[mellowdrama]

I was actually at the huge Forever21 at Powell & Market in SF, and it was literally 3 floors of what appeared to be Hawaiian muu muu-print maternity blouses. If anyone should be suing anybody, it should be pregnant Polynesians vs. Chloe, DVF, and Forever21.

 

[splatooey]

i love forever21--i think dvf is stupid, i mean the price points are so different, if i liked the dress but it was $200, i wouldn't be buying it anyway, i love forever21's disposable clothes, its perfect for a summer or two and then in the trash...but you always look trendy.

 

[Assembler]

If F21 followed the law and changed the five things necessary, and doesn't advertise as a DVF dress, then they've not done anything wrong in my opinion.

For example. There are tons of manufacturers of DVDs out there. Blank writeable dvd's. They look mostly the same except for a label that says what company it actually is. They are made to different qualities however, and some are more reliable than others. People who want reliable pay a bit more for that. People who don't care if 10% of the disks are bad if they're a great deal will get that.

It's the nature of competition.

If designers want to make something that others don't knock off they should make something that is HARD to knock off. Or for which the material DOES matter. If a designer makes something that can be knocked off and sold for such a small price point, then the actual construction of the item wasn't that complex, and the fabric wasn't important for the item. Who cares if it took them a long time to design it! That is subjective. Perhaps a DVF designer spent 10 minutes designing it and presto. I don't think the amount of work that goes into coming up with a design should ever be taken into consideration and just the final product.

 

[Assembler]

I trade to add something to the above post, but I timed out.

Basically I meant to say that I do understand why this is hurting DVF. Many of her customers probably enjoy the exclusivity of her garments. Mass market retailers like F21 get much broader market dilution of their garments. You're more likely to see people walking around wearing the same thing when they're wearing F21. I think some of DVFs customers would choose not to purchase her dress because it no longer feels original to wear it. In that case she is losing sales because of F21's dress even though her customers aren't going over to F21 to buy the dress. They're just choosing not to get it at all.

I don't think it helps her case out. It all depends on how many details are different in the F21 dress and her dress. And that decision is probably going to be subjective.

 

[Assembler]

oops

 

[kellynjane]

DVF isn't the only brand that Forever21 has blatantly reproduced.

The dress on the left is from Foley and Corinna. It's several seasons old but still a huge hit - in fact, until last week, it was in the Calypso boutique window right next to our office. Paris Hilton has worn it on late night television and looked actually adult.
Last year, when Foley and Corinna had a fashion editor party, we witnessed some fashion editors actually fight for it.
On Wednesday, I almost stole it from a stylist's apartment, but admittedly, it looked better on her.
It retails on ShopBop for $440.
The dress on the right is from Forever 21. It sells for $40.
And you will buy....?

But god, I love me some Forever 21.

(fashionista)

 

[kellynjane]

And another:

Anna Sui sent this candy-striped dress down her Spring '07 runway. Though it's capably swished by Coco Rocha, there's something that's not quite right with it...
Oh wait, it's the price tag.
You see, that gorgeous dress is over $200, but Forever 21 has a dangerously similar one for $17.80.
Which one would you wear?

(fashionista)

 

[mellowdrama]

^I'd buy the cheaper ones because I am poor. If I were to buy it at all, that is. It's the same as file-sharing or YouTube or what have you---it's not like I'm gonna buy a television and pay for cable, or buy an album full of junk. I choose my unnecessary crap very carefully.

If I value it, I will buy it. Then I will resell it while the fickle market still finds some worth in it. Think of all those abandoned pet rocks from the '70s. Brings a tear to my eye.

And as for frocks--someone who can afford the $200 one will buy it, but poor folks like me would never consider spending that much money on a dress. We're not lining up for the latest packaged-pop sensation or stupid movie, either. We simply cannot afford it.

If you don't want to be ripped off, stop being clever, I guess. For myself, I've put ideas out into Internet Land and seen them digested and spit back elsewhere. Big deal--I'm either delusional or flattered. Both, maybe. Hell, my own father invented stereo (recording and playback) in the late 1950's when everyone was still listening to their mono Hi-Fi's. Dad didn't patent it. He was and still is a tinkerer: the joy is creation. We've both got work to do.

I do understand that there are starving Intellectual property lawyers to feed, but eventually might will make right. And when you're dealing with a culture where imitation is not only flattery, but art: well, watch where you spit, kiddies. Thar's gold in that thar effluvia.

We all can wear Mao uniforms so everything's fair and equal. I bet my uniform will be scratchier than some others', though. That's how it goes:
My pie is in the sky.

 

[kellynjane]

^ Amen.

 

[Madhuri]

A lot of designers admit to being "inspired" -- a nice way of saying "copying"-- designers that came before them so they can't really complain about someone copying them.

 

[writergal28]

What happens when we go as far as a designer suing another because he/she made a black pencil skirt?

 

[farren fashion]

i can name numerous knockoffs at forever 21. if everyone that forever 21 ripped of fwanted to sue them, they'd be bankrupt.

 

[chaneladdict]

No kidding. I walked in there yesterday and saw a dress that was almost exactly like this one, except the flowers were yellow.

(style.com)

 

[farren fashion]

i think what the designers may be upset about is the fact that they get no credit for it. i mean, besides those who are involved in the fashion world and know what's going on within it, no one will know where forever 21 ripped off their ideas from and will not give the credit these worked hard for you know?

 

[mellowdrama]

^The designers themselves usually have interns and underlings who also don't get any credit. It's hard to make a name for oneself anymore. I sincerely believe names, labels, and creative design endeavors are becoming unenforceable patents. You can call it thievery or "democratization", I suppose.

I see it linked to globalization, raising standards of living, a greater population of eager consumers, "cheap chic", factory worker's conditions, fair trade, etcetera. Everyone wants to look like they have millions even if they don't.

Probably the only thing that'd stop it is World War or Depression, plus knocking the satellites out of the sky. Then we wouldn't know what to desire much more than food and shelter. That's the bulk of the populace's dream, anyway, you know?

I prefer my knock-off, slave-labor glad rags. It's a good front for my wanting to lead the Good Life.

 

[Echoes]

I was going to start a new thread, but dug this one up instead since it's so similar.

Designer Von Furstenberg sues Target over dress

Thu Jan 24, 2008 6:24pm EST

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A top fashion designer sued Target Corp on Thursday for copyright infringement and other claims, saying the discount store is selling dresses with a print that is nearly identical to its "spotted frog design."

Diane Von Furstenberg Studio LP, named after its founder, said Target was selling a "Merona Animal Print Wrap Dress" that infringed on its copyright, according to a complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

"Defendants' infringing dresses are 'wrap' dresses made of materials designed to look like silk jersey, a style consumers and the general public have come to associate with DVF," the complaint said.

Target stopped selling the dresses on its Web site on January 23 after the designer sent it a notice about it, according to the complaint, but the dresses are still available in Target stores.

Target declined to provide immediate comment.

Von Furstenberg, who let loose a fashion tidal wave with her "Wrap Dress" in 1972 -- one design suitable for women of all ages and sizes -- has clothed such celebrities as actress Julia Roberts.

Her company sells clothes and other products on its Web site and at upscale retailers such as Neiman Marcus and Saks Inc's Saks Fifth Avenue.

It said it used the spotted frog design on dresses, luggage, handbags, swimwear and other products.

(Reporting by Paritosh Bansal, editing by Richard Chang)

© Reuters 2008 All rights reserved

 

[esile]

wow! the "inspired" versions are uncanny!

 

[pointup]

i think what the designers may be upset about is the fact that they get no credit for it. i mean, besides those who are involved in the fashion world and know what's going on within it, no one will know where forever 21 ripped off their ideas from and will not give the credit these worked hard for you know?

yeah maybe they should start marketing like those really cheap perfume aerosols..
"if you like ck1 try china thunderstorm"

but rather "if you like Prada s/s 07 try Forever 21 synthetic blend dress"

 

[shopdiary]

DVF missed this one:

Target is carrying a Mossimo tunic (pictured on the right) which is a direct copy of DVF's Scattered Stones print from Spring 2007.