Fashion is more than attire and instead can be the cloak used to display one’s identity. It’s a form of self-expression that not only represents one’s style, but instead can showcase culture, religion, class and identity. Further, there are several tiers catering to the masses of fashion: luxury labels that create the new trends, mid-level boutiques that emulate runway looks and large retailers like Target that provide mainstream access to these looks. Additionally, there are many brands that encompass luxury fashion all the way to small retail businesses. Within the last century, there has been another key player working to disrupt this known fashion model: fast fashion. It is fashion aimed at being more accessible to consumers by replicating designer labels with cheaper prices but is often done through exploitation of workers and the environment. This ever growing market is continuing to plagiarize other brands by “taking the exact pattern, eliminating the message behind by the designer, and making it an easily purchased garment in any fast fashion store” (Zouitina, 1). Fast fashion isn’t known for its originality but for their copied work of different fashion labels. Within our society today, there are no legal protections and punishment for plagiarism regarding fashion label’s original works, granting access for fast fashion to create lookalikes while reducing the original value of the lookalike’s creator.
Ever since the birth of fast fashion in the 1940’s, fashion labels are having a harder time protecting their works from lookalikes being sold to their consumers. The fast fashion industry was built around the idea that its products should be available to an average consumer. This process of “taking the exact pattern, eliminating the message behind by the designer, and making it an easily purchased garment in any fast fashion store” is one of many fast fashion problems in society today (Hanbury, 1). This replication of other company’s works is unethical and wrong. This is like just school: when someone plagiarizes there are consequences. Fast fashion companies are able to get inspiration by stealing an already available design and transforming it into their product at a much cheaper price. Unfortunately, most of these replications are very similar to the original ones, leading more consumers to pick the cheaper price over the original product. This is demonstrated by a fast fashion company altering “a trend to make it a little more wearable for the average consumer ― but often, fast fashion brands produce garments that look like they were ripped straight from the catwalk” (Brucculieri, 1). As new replicated products are being produced, our society keeps pushing consumers into purchasing it. To average consumers, prices are a major consideration which often becomes the greatest denominator in choosing between the product’s original brand or a similar one at a cheaper price. Fast fashion’s unethical practices have been aimed towards both luxury and retail fashion companies due to the lack of protection in the fashion industry.
Runaway shows play a significant role in helping fashion companies differentiate themselves and hold their value while fast fashion is trying to copy their designs. Usually after watching a runaway show, consumers want to buy the newest product and feel “trendy” for their social status. Fast fashion companies replicate these looks and designs with an incentive for grabbing more consumers at a cheaper price. Further, these companies face no repercussions for replicating the designs as their own. When comparing fashion to other modern industries, fashion appears to be the only one excluded from consequences for replicating another's work. By having no punishment, luxury fashion labels are having to work even harder on their runaway shows to create looks that are harder to recreate. A recent example is the luxury brand Balenciaga during Paris Fashion Week 2022: the brand’s runaway show consisted of models wearing their new line containing ripped and dirty outfits while walking through mud puddles. The new clothing products were mostly streetwear with a sharp yet contemporary appearance. Creating a certain distinct style or products is the luxury brand’s technique in trying to avoid replication from other brands. Since there are no restrictions for duplicating designers' works, brands like Balenciaga are required to create very distinctive looks to make it more difficult for others to steal their designs. If we continue to allow fast fashion to recreate a brand's products, more work and efforts will be required for fashion labels to keep their brand value.
Fast fashion has affected luxury fashion companies by reproducing similar looks and designs at a lower cost, diverting some customers to purchase their cheaper alternatives. Some of these fast fashion companies, including Zara, Forever 21 and H&M, can have replicas available in their stores a few weeks after the originals were introduced. These companies face no consequences for their duplicates. When Forever 21 copied Gucci’s most well-known "blue-red-blue" and "green-red-green" stripes on their clothing, they suffered no fines. Forever 21 argued those colors represent an “American success story” and "many clothing and accessory items adorned with decorative stripes [...] are sold by countless third parties. Gucci should not be allowed to claim that Gucci, alone, has a monopoly on all blue-red-blue and green-red-green striped clothing and accessory items'' (Duggan,1 ). But, if a look-a-like item appears in mass quantity, the value of the original decreases. This incentivizes the continual plagiarism seen throughout the fashion industry as companies can find all their creative designs on someone else’s runway for free.
Fast fashion companies are also affecting non-luxury brands by copying their products without having any consequences, leading to a decrease in brand value and differentiation from other fashion labels. These less known fashion brands are “struggling to prevent the flow of counterfeits and lookalikes of their online bestsellers” ( Shoaib and Maguire, 1). These fashion brands are not only paying the price of having another brand copy their products, but additionally having a decrease in sales. These independent brands are “now reporting a surge in counterfeit products bearing their logos as well as a wave of unbranded lookalikes of their best-known designs'' (1). One example is Pangaia: a smaller sustainably focused brand known for their basic sweatpants and sweatshirts. Unfortunately, Pangia has been copied by several fast fashion brands “including Boohoo, Shein, Topman, H&M, and Zara” (Zouitina, 1). Further, the brands copying Pangia have the opposite views on sustainability -cheap labor and using unsustainable fabrics full of microplastics. When copied, these designers are not able to share their intentions behind the design if they are stolen and made with opposite intent. Smaller retailers are injured when their designs are stolen and mass produced; this eliminates the allure of exclusivity of the product. No matter the fashion label, fast fashion is able to duplicate their works with no negative consequences for themselves. Fast fashion is continuously able to grow their business by using someone else's work and idea, while the original designer is losing value on their product.
While some of the bigger and luxury companies may have more access to legal protection, no fashion labels have complete control over whether or not fast fashion will copy their brand; this is all coming from a lack of protection in the industry. Depending on how big a fashion brand can be, they have better access to lawyers and legal protection, but lawyers do not guarantee that there will be no design theft. At the end of the day, even with a lawyer, fashion labels won’t be able to win their originality and product back when there is no legal protections established in the system. When looking at the financial side, some companies may struggle more than others depending on how much money they have to invest in protection. The smaller fashion companies have “limited budgets and have to be very strategic about how [to] pursue IP coverage and protection” (Shoaib and Maguire, 1). This coverage requires significant funds that are harder to acquire when starting as a small business. These factors all come into play when companies are trying to stand up for their brand’s originality and awareness. Christiane Campbelle once said “to be protectable by copyright, an item cannot be functional”. This states that fashion cannot be fully protectable. Even with the legal resources one fashion company might have access to, their works will not be fully protected. This is why the fashion industry needs to focus on other ways in solving this issue such as educating the consumer on fast fashion’s unethical practices.
As we don't have a protection method that fully works regarding an original brand product or design, we must educate consumers on the unethical practices that fast fashion companies practice today. We need to decrease the purchasing of these lookalikes; even though these replicated products might be similar, the material and intent are completely different. With a focus on the consumer, we can shift their decision making process on whether it not its worth it to buy or support a brand acting unethically.
Fashion will always be a form of self expression for our society by representing someone’s identity. With the different markets of fashion, every consumer can decide which one they will support and buy from. With the rise of fast fashion, copy likes and replicated fashion designs and products are being mass produced. When looking at the fashion industry as a whole, the lack of protection is leading them to face consequences regarding their products. It is further negatively impacting the fashion industry by lowering the worth of fashion labels and their original products. Some consumers might start to look at certain fashion brands differently due to their works being copied into a cheaper product. Runaway shows are a way for fashion labels to improve their worth by creating new unique products that are routinely stolen and replicated by fast fashion labels. Due to the lack of legal protection, this cycle persists. You get punished for copying someone’s work in any other industry. Why is it any different in fashion?
Works Cited
Brucculieri, Julia. “Here's How Brands like H&M Get Away with Copying Other Designers.” HuffPost, HuffPost, 4 Sept. 2018, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fast-fashion-copycats_n_5b8967f9e4b0511db3d7def6.
Clugston, Hannah. “Quitting Fast Fashion a Decade Ago Taught Me the Joys of Shopping Second-Hand.” British Vogue, British Vogue, 6 Sept. 2022, https://www.vogue.co.uk/fashion/article/quitting-fast-fashion-buying-second-hand.
Duggan, Leeann. “In an Unexpected Twist, Forever 21 Is Now Suing Gucci.” Allure, Allure, 28 June 2017, https://www.allure.com/story/forever-21-gucci-lawsuit-stripes.
“Fast Fashion: Art or Plagiarism?” The Next Cartel, 12 May 2022, https://thenextcartel.com/discover/fast-fashion-art-or-plagiarism/.
Fury, Alexander. “There Was No Escaping This Balenciaga Show.” AnOther, AnOther Magazine, 6 Oct. 2022, https://www.anothermag.com/fashion-beauty/14422/balenciaga-ss23-demna-mud-review.
Hanbury, Mary. “Zara and Forever 21 Have a Dirty Little Secret.” Business Insider, Business Insider, https://www.businessinsider.com/zara-forever-21-fast-fashion-full-of-copycats-2018-3.
Maliha Shoaib, Lucy Maguire. “How Independent Brands Are Resisting Counterfeits.” Vogue Business, 8 Nov. 2021, https://www.voguebusiness.com/fashion/how-independent-brands-are-resisting-counterfeits.
Muchaneta Kapfunde Muchaneta Kapfunde is a sought-after expert and a firmly-established editorial voice in fashion technology. A contributor for Vogue Business and Wareable.com, et al. “Blockchain in Fashion: Is It Ready?” The Interline, 11 May 2022, https://www.theinterline.com/03/2022/blockchain-in-fashion-is-it-ready/.
Comentarios