'FASHIONABLE'

Intellectual Property The fashion industry is an ever flowing cycle of repeated trends, copied designs and occasionally fresh ideas - but that's what makes it 'fashion' - everyone doing the same thing makes it 'fashionable' right? However this introduces the issue of intellectual property and how those within the industry are able to protect their original ideas/designs. Chanel's 2015 Metiers d'Art collection was challenged by a Scottish Fair Isle Knitwear designer, Mati Ventrillon, after some of the knits they had purchased from her the summer before appeared on the catwalk. While the collection was meant to portray the fine craftsmanship behind Chanel's partners and what they bring to in house collections. Instead it contradicted the trust between powerful brands and craft, not giving acknowledgement for work of an independent designer. Ventrillon later took to social media (of course) to express how Chanel staff had visited Fair Isle and bought some of her stock - with her idea being that such a huge fashion brand would have no need to completely copy her designs. Chanel later made a formal apology and finally acknowledged that Mati's designs were a "source of inspiration" for parts of their collection and have now included the words 'Mati Ventrillon design' in it's communication tools. It's argued that this wasn't truly a case of stolen intellectual property as the Fair Isle pattern itself is in the public domain and not copyright protected like many other designers such as Harris Tweed, however how Ventrillon put together the designs did make the knits intellectual property of her own. In order to prevent this occurring again Fair Isle patterns would have to be registered and protected but being such a small platform this can be damaging to the brand. While Harris Tweet has an infrastructure suited to manufacturing for big brands Fair Isle does not, this would limit their patterns exposure into the fashion industry. And this isn't Chanel's first offence - in 2012 the design house came under fire and was ordered to pay €200,000 in a lawsuit filed by World Tricot (a former supplier). The French knitwear company accused Chanel of "slavishly" copying a number of crotchet designs. Seems to me Chanel's knitwear department needs some serious inspo. Issues with Intellectual property rights also hit our favourite hight street brands; Fast fashion means exactly what it says - fashion is coming and going and it's fast - meaning designs, prints and ideas are pretty much copied across the whole of the high street. Recently H&M - a notorious copycat - filed a law suit against Forever 21 - another copycat - for intellectual property infringement of their "Beach Please" tote bag. I must admit it does look pretty identical but every thing does nowadays. H&M began producing the beach bag in it's U.S. stores and online in April 2014 and since sold thousands worldwide. H&M argued that due to the bags success it's now seen as recognisable H&M branding and so federally registered its copyright of the design. In the Lawsuit H&M accused Forever 21 of "employing companies in China to manufacture and import the infringing product in the U.S." and brought up the fact that Forever 21 had previously been accused of copyright violations - This was an invalid point as H&M had also been sued before by Converse for producing shoes that were very similar to the original Chuck Taylor's - They also expressed that unless Forever 21 stops the sale of the bag the confusion created between brands will cause irriversable damage to the H&M's reputation. They also demanded they pay up all the profits the bag copy had made! This kind of old news though - Forever 21 have been sued more than 50 times for supposedly stealing the work of other designers without giving them any recognition. They usually resolve the cases through admitting their guilt, giving financial compensation and acknowledging the designer as a form of 'inspiration'- if that's what you can call it - Susan Scadifi, a professor of fashion law reached the conclusion that copyrighting must be "part of their business strategy". They take the designs they want, with the risk of getting caught and when they are, they just pay up, "It's probably cheaper than licensing it in the first place." but of course this was never confirmed by Forever 21. But I can't help but think this is the business plan for most fashion brands - like i said, isn't that what makes something fashionable? It's made to be copied.