Protecting Fakes

[tealady]

If you go to a site like Choice Kicks, or other sites that sell fake designer items on the internet, you find language like this in their disclaimers:

Disclaimer:
If you are affiliated with or working for Adidas, Manolo Blahnik, Converse, Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Burberry, Hermes, Prada, Air Jordan, Nike, Timberland, Gucci, Cartier, Mitchell and Ness either directly or indirectly, or any other related group, or were formally a worker, you CANNOT enter these web pages, links, nor access any of its files and you cannot view any of the HTML files. If in fact you are affiliated or were affiliated with the above said companies, by entering this site you are not agreeing to these terms and you are violating code 431.322.12 of the Internet Privacy Act signed by Bill Clinton in 1995 and that means that you CANNOT threaten our ISP(s) or any person(s) or company storing these files, and cannot prosecute any person(s) affiliated with this website. By continuing to enter this site, you are expressly and implied agreeing to all terms as stated above, and affirm that you are in compliance with all federal, state and local laws concerning the content of this site. Also, Choicekicks is in no way affiliated with, representing, associated or sponsored by Adidas, Air Jordan, Burberry, Chanel, Converse, Gucci, Hermes, Louis Vuitton, Manolo Blahnik, Nike, Prada, Timberland, or any other above mentioned name brands of their products. We do not represent our replica products to be original nor do we represent that they are exact copies, therefore, they do not violate any copyright laws. We simply ask consumers to compare quality and price of the above mentioned name brands to ours. Any reference to brand names or "compare to" are made strictly for comparison and to encourage consumers to immediately go buy the real product after comparing.
Note: Any purchase(s) made by you indicates that you have agreed with this disclaimer. To enter/purchase from these web pages and links, you must agree to the terms of agreement (displayed above).

Why did Bill Clinton sign legislation that permits people to rip people off over the internet? I don't get it.

 

[brian]

I have no idea, but that is seriously f*cked up.

 

[leyla m.]

this is just simply ridiculous.....

its like digging their own grave... trying to be subtle about it

 

[PrinceOfCats]

That citation is totally false:

http://www.snopes.com/legal/privacy.htm

 

[leyla m.]

im glad you claryfied that prince... i thought so

 

[ahhGucci]

Was I the one that introduced you all to www.chiocekicks.com, Its created quite a stir, but I do agree, this disclaimer is proving that what they are doing is ripping of other manufacturers, not just Burberry, Gucci and Louis Vuiton, but also Nike and Air Jordan. But considering that the market of these trainers is the 'Gangsta' rap crowd, not many of them would care if the shoes ripped of Gucci or not.
I apologize if my positng of this website has upset anyone?
But I ask you this, what they are doing on the website, IS IT ILLEAGAL?
If so, I will have to tell my aquaintence to stop this nonsense, ohhh, business is a chore.

 

[PrinceOfCats]

It's illegal...however keeping videos of commercial TV programmes is also illegal...

 

[brian]

Originally posted by ahhGucci@Feb 8th, 2004 - 7:35 am
Was I the one that introduced you all to www.chiocekicks.com, Its created quite a stir, but I do agree, this disclaimer is proving that what they are doing is ripping of other manufacturers, not just Burberry, Gucci and Louis Vuiton, but also Nike and Air Jordan. But considering that the market of these trainers is the 'Gangsta' rap crowd, not many of them would care if the shoes ripped of Gucci or not.
I apologize if my positng of this website has upset anyone?
But I ask you this, what they are doing on the website, IS IT ILLEAGAL?
If so, I will have to tell my aquaintence to stop this nonsense, ohhh, business is a chore.

Your "aquaintence" owns that website?

Shame!

And of course it's illegal!

 

[ahhGucci]

I'm not sure if he does own it or just has an affiliation with it, but still, I agree, shame on him.
And you better have been directing that anger toward him, or you and me are gonna be having some words!

 

[leyla m.]

Originally posted by ahhGucci@Feb 8th, 2004 - 9:24 pm
I'm not sure if he does own it or just has an affiliation with it, but still, I agree, shame on him.
And you better have been directing that anger toward him, or you and me are gonna be having some words!

yes the anger wasnt towards you

 

[tealady]

Okay, here's what I don't get. Designers like the kind being faked here have big-time lawyers who know about internet & copyright law. So what do these sites think they are accomplishing by citing a non-existent law in their disclaimer. All it does is point out up front that they are selling fakes. Is it so that consumers cannot sue them for fraud when they find out they've bought a fake?

And I didn't mean to pick on choicekicks.com per se, they were just a recent example which I encountered in another discussion. I've seen the same language used on several sites.

 

[leyla m.]

i believe its simple stupidity!!
and being NAIVE. thats only gonna attract the ones who are after them

 

[PrinceOfCats]

The problem is - nobody 's after them. If you look at sites like eBay you can see that designers are clearly not interested in protecting their intellectual property on the 'net.

In an interview with John Galliano in Paris, Galliano points out to the journalist a street where the best fakes are made

 

[Luna]

that's just crazy.

 

[tealady]

Even less reason for such disclaimers...

 

[PrinceOfCats]

A single Google search makes interesting reading:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-...%22ebay+sued%22

 

[PrinceOfCats]

Don't let the Swiss get hold of you though :

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/9770.html