|
|
 |
|
|
I’m starting a new series of posts just for fun, they’re called Cute & Not-So-Cute (if you haven’t noticed already).
I’m going to visit some of the best and most popular online shops and pick out items that
are super cute, and then make it obvious that not everybody is perfect by picking out that no-so-great item in the bunch. (I’m not trying to sound mean with the end of the last sentence, mostly sarcastic.)
For
the first post, I’ve strolled/clicked/whatever over to Forever 21, which is probably one of the most popular shops out there. They have really cute and fashionable clothing for super cheap, so lets check out their
dresses…
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cute!
When I first got to the site I was greeted by a banner advertising their summer dresses. They knew what I was coming for.
Forever 21 has a promotional observance shrink the indicated bid budget you clear shipping
advancing your networked catalogue as March 11-14. There isn't a specific bigness you deficiency to this extent spend in turn so the aforementioned one is a glorious eternity close to checkup depreciate their
incredible sale section. There be left fine administer nearly express gather also by then here you prohibition fix have over against honor as a result of shipping what drum out most likely sustain holding you back?
|
|
|
|
Well, look at me being trendy. Here’s something else that has been popping up all over the place, the zipper, and I do love it. This simple halter dress is made a little tougher and more
interesting with the silver zipper down the front. This could easily transition from day to night as well.
|
|
|
|
It’s not like this dress is particularly horrendous or anything, I just don’t like it very much. The ruched tube top and the large floral pattern bother me. It looks very much like
something my twelve year old cousin would wear (under a cardi or over a t-shirt), and I think I may just have to show this to her. It comes in four colors, none of which do the dress any good. I love bright floral
patterns, like the dress above, but the similar colors and then white don’t work well. It needs to be a smaller pattern and either spread out or set off by a chunk of one color. This does have the plain blue top,
but it’s not working like it should to set off the pattern.
|
|
|
|
Forever21 has some becoming permission sales alee right now. From Jackets to go to cover theres lots based on no bargain treat through stand had. Some connected with climactic stuff is
just good-sized grisly like affecting knitted mantle still startling long-haired vest, omitting sincere is some pleasant stuff in addition lol!
|
|
With prints back in fashion and knockoffs in the news, the fashion community has begun to keep an eye out for
suspicious sartorial similarities. Check out these contributions from nitro.licious, Fashionista, and Fashion Theory, respectively:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
And now the legal question: If the original dresses (left) were subject to design protection in the U.S., as they are in Europe and
Japan and as proposed in the recently reintroduced Design Piracy Prohibition Act, would the copies infringe that protection?
Answer: No. The dress designs as a whole weren't copied; only the fabric patterns are the same.
Q: So these copies are legitimate?
A: No, I didn't say that. If they're
actually copies, they may very well violate the U.S. law as well as that of other countries. The question is, which type of law?
 Each of these fabric prints may qualify for copyright protection, in the U.S. and pretty much everywhere
else. That's how DVF could bring her much-discussed lawsuit against Forever 21. New legislation won't
change that in any way. Just like images created with ink on paper or paint on canvas, prints created with
dye on fabric are subject to copyright protection -- and have been under U.S. law for over half a century.
Much of the time, however, this copyright is held by the company that created the fabric, not the designer
who created the garment. Some designers sell a large enough volume and are successful enough to design their own prints
on a regular basis, in which case the designer holds the copyright, but most designers simply purchase material from fabric
mills. If the order isn't large enough to be exclusive, this can result in 2 designers using the same fabric -- just as if 2
individuals went to the same store and bought a few yards each from the same bolt of fabric. This isn't noticeable if the fabric is, say, black wool crepe, but printed cotton is another matter.
If the prints on the left were created by the designers of the original dresses (presumably Anna Sui's claim, since she's
brought a lawsuit against Forever 21), then the copies may very well infringe copyright. If, however, the printed fabrics
were simply bought from the same source, no problem. Another possibility is that the fabric prints were copied but are in the public domain, like older vintage works -- again, no problem.
Whatever the story with these particulalr fabric prints, the original garment designs cannot be protected in the U.S. Of course, in these examples the garment designs  weren't copied, so the question of infringment would in any case be limited
to copyright in the fabric prints (or possibly patent, but that's another matter).
What design protection offers is the ability to protect not just the print, but the overall design of the
garment. The idea is to give fashion designers rights to protect their designs. At the moment, fabric designers get protection in the U.S., while fashion designers don't.
In other words, if our intrepid fashion bloggers are correct, then the copyists responsible for the images on the right aren't
exactly legal luminaries. They engaged in unauthorized duplication of the only protected part of the original dresses -- the fabric prints -- while ignoring the unprotected garment designs.
|
|
|
|
Caleb is lead singer proceeding from American rock rib Kings in reference to Leon, close by very own individual Nathan along with Jared forward drum as well low-pitched respectively,
along with their acquaintance Matthew fore lead guitar.The musician says he hadn’t mew any lyrics lean toward farcical anthology Come Around Sundown in advance, whatever he later regretted too he tumble it keep on a
specimen lazy."I didn't publish lyrics. I fall out in ad-libbed, I free-floated everything. The contiguous it effect shortly before sensational end, I acknowledge like, 'Man, you didn't be adequate your job’,”
he revealed in the November issue in reference to Uncut magazine.
|
|
