Comments on: Protecting Fashion Ideas Law

By: Augusta

Augusta — Fri, 15 May 2009 01:43:54 +0000

Artists are protected by rights and lawyers do not understand the terminology used in fine art. A graphic designer is protected when the law doesn’t understand the difference between Cold and Hot pressed paper….

So there’s no argument there in my opinon.

By: Kaaren Hoback

Kaaren Hoback — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:28:03 +0000

Can you imagine the pages and pages of descriptive detail it would take to describe a white bridal gown with pearl and lace trimmings for copyright? The design process would need to include a very detailed description.

Whose color chart is acceptable to define color or will there be a limit to a Pantone number or will color be defined by RGB values or something else? Will we have to define the fabric and source beyond content and care instructions? Will changing the lace motif or it’s position, or the size of the pearls or the flare of the skirt from 5 to 6 degrees invalidate the copyright? If so who does this protect?

When retailers use descriptive terms incorrectly describing apparel in their adverts how can we expect Jane Q to understand the difference between a cowl neckline and a scoop? Will a lawyer really know the difference between a godet and a gore?

This bill is a ludicrous waste of time and energy as written.
Kaaren

By: jenny

jenny — Sat, 26 May 2007 11:09:46 +0000

Does this herald an era of de-democratisaion of clothing? A return to limiting style, fabric or colour to one class, while the plebs must dress as reconisable plebs, policed by lawyers seeking damages for couture designers . Ironic that this appears as an era of street led fashion (punk goth grunge military etc) fades and a return of glamour is heralded. OK so maybe I’ve overdosed on conspiracy theories, its just lawyers with a keen eye on profits to pick from manufacturers and distributors.

By: Kathleen

Kathleen — Fri, 25 May 2007 18:15:13 +0000

What’s really ironic -speaking of copyright protection- is that I’ve spent all week fighting with GoDaddy.com to suspend service to a site they host that is publishing all of my material. And Google adsense. There are sites out there, called “Splogs” that scrape content from websites, publishing it on their own. They do it to make money on google adsense. GoDaddy took the site down for awhile but it’s back up again! This has been very nerve wracking and it’s hard to solve this problem while still carrying my usual workload. GoDaddy definitely gets my vote for unethical behavior. Anything for a buck. They have been very unresponsive.

By: Phyllis

Phyllis — Fri, 25 May 2007 12:49:11 +0000

I just can’t imgagine what is to be gained with this legislation, and there is no way in hell I can see retailers supporting it.

By: Karen C

Karen C — Thu, 24 May 2007 21:30:52 +0000

I agree that we do not need new laws to protect our designs. If we design something truly unique, there are laws on the books that can be utilized to litigate the matter (such as your previous post about the sweater design). And I also agree that this law will only help those attorneys who already are bringing home $20-50K a month (did you know that’s how much attorneys make? the ones I work with do).