|
is there a difference between a garment that's “inspired by” another and one that's just a copy? the design piracy prohibition act aims to define just that
Jul 16, 2008
|
|
Years ago, when there was less room in her budget for indulgences, Girlawhirl admits to having purchased a fake handbag or two. Whether it was the Itaewon area of Seoul or the night markets in Bangkok or Hong Kong, the allure of the deal often won out. But it's been years since she's been tempted by a fake. These days she'd rather own the real thing. But truth be told, she's not as enamored with pricey handbags as many of her Super Pals are – for her it's all about the clothes. And with a new bill in congress, the way Girlawhirl gets her fashion fix may be changing soon… In terms of fashion, just getting a handle on the situation can be a difficulty. After all, the very definition of fashion implies that when something is “in fashion” or “fashionable” it's what women want at that particular moment in time. And, as Girlawhirl was taught in Econ 101, the marketplace delivers – with multiple versions, price points and derivatives of just what's in demand. But when does “inspired by” cross the line to copied? The US Congress has been debating just that over the course of the past year.
Copyright laws apply to prints and patterns, so the textiles that these prints are on are already protected. But right now there's nothing to protect a garment design; how it's cut and the shape of the actual finished garment. It's all very tricky because there truly are a limited number of fundamental shapes that make up the components of a garment. An industry success is a particular shape made up in just the right fabric, all put together with of-the-moment details, creating something that's suddenly coveted by enough people to create the snowball of demand – chased by clothing manufacturers who serve all price points – often referred to as the “trickle down effect.”
A bill in Congress, called the Design Piracy Prohibition Act, would allow designers exclusivity on any silhouettes and shapes they create for three years. The protection is proposed not just for garments, but also for handbags, footwear, eyeglasses and belts. After three years – that's six seasons — trickling down can begin, leaving Girlawhirl to wonder just what it is that she'd want to purchase six seasons after its heyday?
Runway designers tend to support the bill because they feel it protects their businesses. But manufacturers who serve the mass market are on the other side, feeling that it will force them to make decisions about design details – the shape of a collar for example – based on legal definitions and the need to avoid lawsuits – rather than choosing the right proportion or shape for the garment.
It's a touchy situation indeed, and will ultimately redefine the phrase “inspired by,” if not the fashion industry itself.
|
read more Fashion articles here. click for archives
