This one caught my eye. Designers are suing an online website for infringing on their clothing designs. Hmmm, advertisement or encroachment? I would think the former, but I guess I'm not frenchie in this case. How are these designers losing value or money here on their designs? Is the act of unveiling them at the show considered the "recording" step?
Basic story, website sends photogs to fashion show, where they take pics and later post on website of the fashionable clothes. The french government sided with the designers, the case coming soon to america for real litigation- money. I guess I don't see how the designers can be right in this case. The photographers are clearly capturing an expressive and original record of the clothes that is very different from that of the designer's clothes themselves. Perhaps if the photographers were employed by the designers themselves, then went out and sold the photos on their own I could see infringement of some type.
Dave
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
David,
ReplyDeleteI'm thinking that unless the website credited the designs to the designer specifically when they were posted that they infringed on the designer's right.
For example, when a patent is applied for a description must be given. But in most cases, the description is intentionally vague so that others cannot copy it or copy it with the intention of making improvements to it for their benefit.
By posting the actual design online, as opposed to the clothes or final product, someone can steal any part of the designer's original design for their own. By posting the designs online, they've taken away the designer's right to be exclusive as to who they want to receive this information.
It's kind of like supply and demand. You want to buy this particular designer because their design is "exotic" (for lack of a better word)and "fresh" and so different from anything else you've ever seen. This designer charges $5000 for a dress. If the design is out there and any and everyone has access to it, then anyone can make it (not me, my sewing skills are limited to replacing buttons) and the exclusivity or "limited edition"-feel of owning the dress reduces the demand for it and now it can only be purchased for $50.
The designer can argue that their profitability was affected because their idea was stolen.
I'm really surprised you picked fashion. LOL. In the words of Tyra.. you're fierce!
Dave,
ReplyDeleteWhat website is this? Are they posting these photos just for information or are they actually selling clothes? Do you have a link for the article?
Spencer,
ReplyDeleteHere's a URL for an article on the topic.
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202427076551&rss=newswire
Dave