Courtesy of shoppingblog.com
How will you spend your Thanksgiving break?
You're working your way through the crowded racks at the local low-end trendy megastore. Britney is blaring over the loudspeakers, and you are surrounded both by 14-year-old girls and poor college students. Then, surprisingly, you come across that smoking runway look you've been lusting over for months, but you would never be able to afford in real life. And the garment costs a mere $19.95.
But before you snap it up, consider the real cost of this designer doppelganger. By buying the garment and supporting the copycat brand, are you hindering the designer whose looks you love so much? Are you condoning the copying of designs in the fashion industry?
These are only the beginning of questions raised in the recent lawsuit between high-fashion label Trovata and multinational retail chain Forever 21. In 2007, the folks behind the runway brand took Forever 21 to court for trade dress infringement — an allegation that refers to the copying of a product's visual characteristics in a way that suggests Forever 21's products were actually Trovata's.
The franchise is accused of copying seven of Trovata's tops, down to the patterns, buttons, trim and, in one case, tag. Pictures on the Internet that compare several of Forever 21's tops in question to those made by Trovata show the tops are nearly indistinguishable. But on Oct. 9, after two arduous years of litigation, the case was declared a mistrial due to a hung jury.
The trial brought to light the issue of copyright infringement in the fashion industry. Though it is only illegal to copy patterns on garments, as they are regarded as art, there is no definite law against copying an article of clothing as a whole. But many fashion designers are now pushing to change this.
The question still remains: Is it OK for a mass retailer like Forever 21 (which has been sued more than 50 times for copyright infringement) to copy the intellectual property and creative vision of designers in order to make it accessible to a larger group of people, or does the re-creation hurt the designer?
"Fashion is something that brings people happiness and pride," Tisch freshman Rob Sobotnik said. "They have the opportunity to feel good about themselves and what they're wearing, so the fact that [the clothing is] more feasible and affordable I think is a definite plus."
LSP freshman Asli Durak agreed that copying fashion isn't a problem.
"If people know that it's mimicking legitimate designers, then I don't see where the harm is," Durak said.
But he added the difference in the clothing is certainly noticeable: "Whenever you get something nice, you can tell that its quality and fit [is] so much better."
CAS freshman Carina Wolff was undecided on the matter.
"It's nice that [Forever 21] provides a cheaper way for people who can't afford high-fashion clothing," she said, but added that their styles shouldn't be identical to designers'.
"It isn't fair to the designer who actually took the time to pick the fabric and create the clothing line," Wolff said.
So while having the latest runway looks available to you at a fraction of the price may be a blow in the face for the original designers, it is arguably one of the best ways to get the most bang for your buck — especially on a college student's budget.
Judging by the success of the retail giant, which now has over 400 stores in North America and whose business has only improved in the recent recession, Forever 21 probably won't go away anytime soon.
