Looks familiar: Why copying in fashion remains a grey area

Fashion brands copying
other brands is so commonplace in the design landscape that barely anyone
bats an eyelid these days. If you peruse the rails at Zara you will be able
to spot the designer references seen on the catwalks that inspired its
collections, it is that blatantly obvious. One season, not long ago, it was
as if Phoebe Philo from Celine did a collaboration with the Spanish high
street retailer, so canny and literal were its interpretations of her
silhouette. Incidentally many of Celine’s designs could be seen to have
been inspired by the Helmut Lang or Japanese designer’s archives, so you
can only imagine the journey of influence and, urgh, direct referencing.

The wheel of fashion was not invented yesterday

Once, when I worked for a well-known American designer, I found myself in
the company’s design studio, and saw tens of trainer styles in its shoe
department used as sample references. Designers often use a subtle detail
from an existing design and reference it to create something new. The wheel
of fashion is hardly a recent invention and probably this ought not to stir
up too much sentiment.

So when New York brand Maryam Nassir Zadeh informed the world via social
media that one of her signature mule designs was too literally adopted by
another New York brand, Mansur Gavriel, the media has been rife with
comments, accusations and opinions. Why this particularly case is so
interesting is that both are emerging brands and based in the same
neighbourhood, and the ‘copied’ styles appeared within just a few months
from its bought original.

Nassir Zadeh stated: “Since I was notified of Mansur Gavriel design’s
likeness to my shoes, I did research into Maryam Nassir Zadeh store
records. I found proof of purchase receipts [from my store] from Rachel
Mansur dating March, April and May 2015, of the exact styles and colours in
question, as well an earlier purchase of Maryam Nassir Zadeh sandals from
Floriana Gavriel in July 2014. For me, this is clear proof that they had my
designs as a reference to develop their shoe line by emulating my shapes,
materials and colours.”

Mansur Gavriel did not deny they purchased or indeed copied her shoe,
instead they stated: We are well aware of rampant imitation of young
designers in the marketplace and have personally experienced this many
times. However, we are also well aware we do not own the silhouette of the
bucket bag or the tote,” referring to two of their ‘signature’ bag styles.

In the US a designer cannot claim ownership of a functional design

You can understand Nassir Zadeh’s frustration, that this case goes beyond
flattery and the inspiration of someone’s good design. Sadly in American
copyright law Nassir Zadeh cannot claim ownership of the mule, of suede or
of any particular colour. Whilst the similarities between both shoes is
indisputable, it is not a design that American law can protect under its
copyright laws of functional items.

What exists, instead, is a grey area and gentleman’s agreement, whereby
designers use subtle references of past and present designers, but
respecting their original work without wholly copying in its most literal
form. This is what keeps the fashion wheel turning, what keeps the fashion
landscape interesting with new ideas without having to forsake the good of
what has been presented in the past.

If you think about it – the dress, the jean, the shirt, the tie – all
these pieces in our wardrobe were created a long, long time ago. Variations
thereof is what we are wearing today and what we’ll be wearing tomorrow. No
current day designer has invented any of the styles we are wearing today.
But, when it comes to variations thereof, there is a fine line between
ingenuity, referencing and downright copying. Perphaps Mansur Gabriel
didn’t have enough inspiration to design a variation they could call their
own.
Click Here: kenzo online españa