Activewear ripoffs. We need to talk about them.
Knockoffs have been a problem in fashion for ages, but it’s only recently started to infiltrate the world of active fashion. As the activewear market has grown by leaps and bounds, businesses are on the lookout for easy ways to cash in on this popular niche. Producing and selling copycats of successful active designs is emerging as a less-than-honest way to make a quick buck.
One of the first times the copycat problem hit active fashion was last year when Athleta released leggings bearing an uncanny resemblance to K-Deer’s signature stripes. Fortunately, this story had a fairly happy ending, as public outcry influenced Athleta to ultimately pull the designs.
Now, the problem is growing. More and more copycats are popping up, and those copies are becoming even more blatant. It’s high time we talk about it.
Fakes versus ripoffs
Before we dive in, let’s define exactly what we’re talking about. There are two distinct ways businesses steal original fashion designs.
Fakes. Also called: replicas. A fake isn’t just something that looks similar to another style. A fake is actually sold as that brand. Fakes are what you find in sketchy tourist traps selling “Louis Vuitton.” It doesn’t just look like LV, it actually has the logo and is sold to you as if it were LV. Using another brand’s name and logo (read: trademarks) without authorization is a huge no-no and is one of the few cut-and-dry, legally enforceable areas of intellectual property infringement in the fashion world.
Ripoffs. Also called: copycats or lookalikes. This is when one company takes clear “inspiration” from another company and passes off the design as if it were their own. A ripoff doesn’t bear any of the original brand’s logos or name anywhere. For example, Nasty Gal made the embarrassing mistake of claiming Taylor Swift wore their jumpsuit to an awards show, when it was actually an original design by Balmain, from whom Nasty Gal copied the design. It’s important to note that if a company simply steals a design and slaps their own name on it, it is not a “fake.” The two terms aren’t interchangeable since they represent two very different offenses.
For the purposes of this post, I’ll be focusing on ripoffs.
Side note: the term “knockoff” could apply to either of these.
Ripoffs: where is the line?
While there is no ambiguity in one business stealing the trademarks of another, things get murky when it comes to stolen fashion designs. On a legal level, fashion design IP is notoriously tricky. Fashion design patents are somewhere between difficult to obtain and impossible to enforce. On an individual level, where each person draws the line for the ethics of creating and consuming “inspired” designs can vary wildly. My own views have evolved over the years, and I’ll be the first to admit there’s a lot of grey area.
Wherever possible, I try to give the design in question the benefit of the doubt. I don’t want to immediately accuse a company of copying when it’s possible it was an honest coincidence. That said, there are a few things that throw up some serious red flags. Here is my personal framework for evaluating the ethical dubiousness of a ripoff.
1 | Details and obviousness
This first point involves evaluating two similar questions: how complicated is the design and how many details do the two designs share?
If the design is a very simple legging with a black and white striped pattern, of course two different people could come up with that on their own. But as the design gets more complicated with more and more details, the odds of two people coming up with a nearly identical final product shrink dramatically.
Looking at the original vs the suspected copycat, what are some unique elements of the original design and how many are carried over to the copycat? Did they use similar color motifs? A similar pattern? Similar seam placement? Similar straps, cut-outs, and design details? Are there details they don’t share? The more of these similarities I see, the more I suspect foul play.
2 | Repeat offenses
If you’re browsing a website and notice that one design reminds you of another, look for others. I frequently find that the copycat has swiped more than one design either from the same brand or multiple brands. When you start seeing product after product that appear to be copied designs, it’s harder and harder to give them the benefit of the doubt.
3 | Timing
This one is pretty simple: whose design came first? The fashion cycle typically takes around 1 year from ideation to products hitting the shelves, but some companies (particularly fast fashion brands) have been able to shorten that cycle to more like 3-6 months. If two similar designs come out around the same time, you can probably chalk it up to a similar interpretation of current trends. But if one comes several months after the other, I’ll raise an eyebrow.
Once you’ve evaluated the first three points, you’ve probably got a pretty good idea of whether the style in question is a copy. From there, I also consider two additional factors when weighing the situation.
Price point
If Target makes a $25 bag that’s an imitation of a $15,000 Hermes bag, how much does it really hurt Hermes? I would contend not a lot. No customer with a Hermes-level budget is going to seriously consider a Target bag as a viable substitute. While that wouldn’t excuse Target’s designers from their sloppy ethics, the harm that comes from the mimicked design is arguably quite small.
That said, that kind of price difference is rarely found in the activewear world, since there aren’t exactly $3,000 leggings floating around out there.
If Original Brand is selling a design for $100 and Knockoff Brand is selling a shockingly similar design for $80 (or even $20), they’re likely competing for many of the same customers. Arguably, Knockoff Brand could be poaching customers from Original Brand with similar or somewhat lower prices. That’s not fair to Original Brand, and could potentially cause substantial harm to their business.
That being said, I want to be very clear that the price of the original being high in no way provides ethical justification for a ripoff. Yes, fast fashion has proven that there’s a huge market for taking current trends and translating them into something cheap and accessible. But there’s a difference between riffing on the same trend and stealing an entire design, right down to the details. Likewise, just because not everyone can afford a product doesn’t somehow entitle another company to that intellectual property. A brand pricing their leggings at $150 is not “asking for it.” Plenty of low-budget brands have managed to come up with non-stolen designs and provide people of all budgets with functional, stylish activewear. Forever 21 (or others) offering cheaper versions of original designs doesn’t exactly make them some sort of fashion Robin Hood.
Imbalance of power
Likewise, if one huge corporation copies designs by another huge corporation, they’re on a relatively level playing field. But when a huge corporation copies from a small, independent designer, it’s a very different situation.
The large business can easily win against the small business in two ways. First, the large one has more resources to squash any legal complaints–if the small business can even afford legal action at all. Second, the indie brand has limited reach and limited influence, meaning that precious few people would even realize the design was copied.
You can see this power dynamic at work in this saga between Zara and an independent artist. A sufficiently large company can essentially throw its weight around to silence the independent artist.
While two companies being similar in size and power doesn’t excuse a copycat, in my opinion a power imbalance makes a bad situation even more infuriating.
Wall of Shame: ripoffs lately
Note: copycat products and sites will not be linked so as not to encourage traffic and purchases.
Forever21 copying Alala
Originals: Alala swell crop, flyweight tee, the cut bra
F21’s Alala copycats check just about every box in the copycat book. They took several designs from Alala’s summer collection last year, making it hard to call the similarities a coincidence. The copycat of the cut bra takes just about every detail, from the neutral print, to the mesh back, right down to the adjustable coral straps. Not subtle.
Forever21 copying Olympia
Originals: Olympia moto leggings (via Carbon38), echo bra
Another not-so-subtle copy comes from Olympia, where they’ve mimicked Olympia’s signature contrast elastic details. Olympia’s moto leggings have been one of their most popular styles, so of course F21 went after that with the textured knee detail.
Forever21 copying Ultracor
Original: Ultracor pixelate leggings (via Carbon38)
The number of details they’ve taken from Ultracor’s original make these a copycat slam dunk. They used the purple and pink ombre, Ultracor’s signature plain elastic waist, the high rise, the dark center seam, and of course the zig zag perforated details.
Forever21 copying lululemon
Originals: lululemon high times pant mett (past season), wild tank (past season), inspire tight
And of course, F21 couldn’t help but add lululemon to their roster, too. All three of these styles are dead ringers for lululemon’s originals in every way. Although lululemon is not a small business like the other brands I’ve highlighted on this list, that doesn’t make it ethical for F21 to shamelessly lift their designs over and over again.
Unfortunately, what I picked out for this list is just a few examples of the copies from F21 and is by no means exhaustive. Taking a gander through their activewear section means rooting through an almost overwhelming number of blatant or suspicious-looking copies from these brands and more. Forever 21 has come under fire for copying designs on numerous occasions and seems to be utterly unapologetic for their practices. But the sheer quantity of stolen designs as well as the repeated small business element in their activewear section brings them to a new low.
Aritzia copying Outdoor Voices
Originals: Outdoor Voices tri-tone warmup leggings and tri-tone slashback crop
Aritiza’s in-house label “The Constant” matched not just one piece but a whole coordinating set from Outdoor Voices. They’ve copied the high neck of the slashback crop, the back cutout, and the colorblocking. They borrowed the exact same dark-to-light heathered colorblocking of the leggings, right down to the curved back seam detail. Even the photography style matches OV’s aesthetic. The only tweaks were the slightly flattened line above the knee leggings versus OV’s diagonal line on the leggings, and the slightly altered colorblocking on the crop top.
Kudos to Catherine @heelsandjuice for spotting this one last week.
Lotus Leggings copying Werkshop
Originals: Werkshop tentacles, seahorses, butterflies, remix
Werkshop’s claim to fame is the ornate, original artwork on their printed leggings. Their founder spends a ton of time designing and perfecting her artwork for each pair of leggings, and it shows. Lotus Leggings lifted nearly indistinguishable patterns from some of Werkshop’s most popular designs.
Lotus has been ruthless in their copying, including using some of Werkshop’s photography for advertisements as well as removing comments and blocking users who point out the stolen artwork. They also have numerous complaints alleging that they’ve taken people’s money without delivering goods, so one can only hope that it’s only a matter of time before they’re forced to close their doors.
For thoughts from a small business’ perspective, Werkshop wrote an article about this here that’s worth reading.
What can we do about it?
If copycats get you all fired up, there are a few things we consumers can do to combat this issue.
First, don’t be afraid to speak up. For example, use social media to bring attention to the problem. Use your own social media platform to raise awareness of ripoffs or leave comments on the copycat’s accounts. Both can help raise visibility for the original designer’s work. The Athleta/K-Deer debacle last year was a good example of this. Athleta’s social media was swarmed by unhappy customers bringing attention to the issue, which I’m sure contributed to the ultimate removal of the designs in question.
You can also contact the brands directly, point out the copied designs, and politely ask them to be removed.
And of course, vote with your dollars. If you believe something is a copy and it rubs you the wrong way, don’t buy it. Instead, funnel your money toward brands you feel are innovative, original, and valuable so that they can keep doing that work.
As for me, I highly value the integrity and creativity of the talented people in the active fashion world. In light of that, I will continue to use my dollars and my voice on this blog to support and promote innovative design and the hard work of small, independent businesses.
Thanks for this overview. I don’t know that I’d pay a low price for a near copycat (unless it’s the case of the 15k Hermes bag by Target and even then I’d have to LOVE it).
After you brought Lotus leggings up before I looked them up and was turned off just by the reviews though their products is gorgeous if copied.
Thanks for the hard work and educating consumers!
You’re welcome Beth, thanks for reading! Lotus’ reviews are indeed pretty awful. Their customers don’t know what they’re missing by not just going straight for Werkshop. :)
as christine (of werkshop) pointed out, lotus has wayy more followers. unfortunately, lots of people buying lotus, which surely buys attention, don’t know about werkshop, which can’t really afford the same level of advertising. in any case, i just got my new tiki werkshop pants today and i must say — i was a little wary, as one can be sometimes getting such wild designs delivered across the world, but they have again exceeded my expectations in awesomeness. i’ve got evil gods on my legs and i couldn’t be happier.
i spelled her name wrong. i think it’s chriztina.
my floral nights are even better in person too!
i went for a size up to wear them as casual summer pants :)
Yeah, it seems like Lotus’ model (and several other similar companies) is basically just to throw a boatload of money at social media marketing without any real investment into product. I’m sure taking people’s money without sending products also helps add to their marketing budget. Ugh. But, I’m glad you love your tikis and glad they were worth the trouble. :)
i’m glad you did this. i’ve been blocked from lotus’ pages on facebook and instagram, yet i still see their paid ads. i’m glad someone with more visibility is spreading the word to avoid these brands. this stuff makes me so annoyed, i’ve never bought anything at athleta just because of their k-deer shittiness. luckily, i’ve never been tempted by forever21. (i guess i don’t secretly wish to be 21 again.)
Yeah I keep looking for a way to block or report Lotus’ ads, and it seems I can’t. Sigh. >:|
I’m inherently drawn to small companies with unique designs (Montiel is a new fave), so I always notice when those designs get ripped off. I’m not exactly the target demographic for F21, so I didn’t know how badly they steal from independent designers. And shamelessly, no less! I’ll echo the earlier comment: thank you for using your platform to draw attention to the issue, and to individually name and shame the perpetrators.
Adding, I just noticed these guys in my FB feed: https://www.namastetics.com/collections/the-essentials
Uhh, you think someone spent a little too much time on the Alo Yoga website? Right down to the (still quite new!) Warrior leggings…
Namasthetics deletes reviews if they are negative. Their leagues are cheap materials and see through…They even blocked me on IG for leaving honest feedback after!! Crazy! Terrible company
Seems like that’s a common strategy with those types of brands. Ugh. >:\ Thanks for the info!
Yeah, I spend sooo much time looking at these indie brands that I can’t help but notice! I spotted the F21 flyweight hoodie copycat on Pinterest, and then when I looked around some more I was just appalled!
I’ve been getting ads for Namastetics as well and noticed their “goddess leggings.” They actually stole their pics from Carbon38 and just used a photo editing tool to change the colors of the leggings. You can tell their C38’s pics because of their distinctive angle and poses. Also check out their tops section. They stole pics from lulu as well. So much shadiness going on with them.
Also relevant: a brand called Nero Label ripped off Alo, too. They have some VEEERY obvious copies of the moto leggings.
Thank you so much for writing this article! I’ve become a Werkshop fan thanks to your amazing reviews, and it broke my heart when I read the blog post by Chriztina. I’m glad that you are bringing this issue forward so that people are aware of the copycats out there. You make a great point about how the narrow price point of athleticwear makes the competition stiff.
You’re welcome, Jen! I’m definitely hoping it raises some awareness around the issue so that people can make a more informed decision. Thanks for reading. :)
Great post! As I’ve mentioned before, I always feel a bit icked out by big corporate activewear companies. I have even stopped buying Lulu, my long time friend, cause of their recent many forms of corporate grossness (although I still think it sucks that they get copied). Even some of the brands that started out smaller and grew quickly (Alo!) turn me off now. I bought some moto leggings at one point and really liked them, but I felt like I would be embarrassed to wear them. In general, I get embarrassed when people might “recognize” something I wear – I’m not sure why?? It’s definitely not rational (nor fair, necessarily)…
I think Sweaty Betty is the only bigger brand that I still love, and they feel like a small company somehow even though they aren’t. Probably part of it is that they are not a US brand, so they are still uncommon here and I don’t see their stuff on people ever. I wonder if the Forever 21s of the UK copy them?! Speaking of which, what a bunch of assholes! I had no idea… probably because the one time I walked in to Forever21, I walked straight back out. My heart started racing at the sight of those thousands of racks of teenager clothes as far as the eye could see.
I have to admit that my “big company” exception is Lorna Jane because I really like their sports bras. And I likewise feel okay about buying them since they aren’t as well known in the US.
i like lorna jane too! particularly because they have a store about 45 minutes away from me. once in awhile it’s nice to actually go shopping in person and pick out things i know i like and will keep (instead of the suspense of online shopping… will it fit?! will it be weird fabric?!) about once a year i head out there and pick out a nice sports bra or top :)
i have the same thing with alo! i mean, with the others, too, but alo is more rare to fill this way about. it’s just a feeling, and it makes me shy away, at least, from their most popular styles. the pointless part is that, here in prague, it’s not actually anywhere. i’m like an activewear hipster, i guess, always looking for the ones people haven’t heard of.
I definitely feel you on lulu’s corporate practices. A lot of what they’ve done has icked me out, but their sizing fits me so well that it’s hard to cut them off completely.
And actually, F21 does have a design that quite a bit like SB:
http://906d39712c1aa37a1faa-e6ffe6e749ba3f6c3a70e2b2a58bd050.r52.cf3.rackcdn.com/images/products/large/sb1653_black.jpg – Makarasana unitard by SB
http://www.forever21.com/images/default_750/00225465-03.jpg – F21 jumpsuit
The backs are a bit different, but it was one of the designs I filed under “suspicious.”
Living in a small town, what people do and don’t recognize is, well, not a thing. Anytime I wear something cute people just ask “is that lulu?” Lol. But I definitely get the urge to wear something no one recognizes. You must be an activewear early adopter. :)
This is such an interesting topic!
Carrie I can for sure say that forever21 in the uk don’t copy sweaty Betty. It’s an American company and we get the same designs and styles as the US does. Actually the activewear scene is still not as big as in the US or Australia. I digress!
I think part of the problem is the consumer wanting to educate themselves and investing time to understand what they are buying into ethically or otherwise. And the problem is that most people just don’t care about spending ££$$ on things or can’t afford to but still have an option to buy something within their budgets.
I feel like this is an economics driven problem and the best we can do is stay true to what we as thinking consumers believe in. I do feel sad though that it’s very difficult to change or remove copycats from the market.
Yes, I do agree that a lot of people simply don’t want to bother–they just want to get something inexpensive and be done, regardless of whether it’s a copycat or an original design. It’s a shame but definitely a tricky problem to address.
Love this post! I notice that J Crew carried Outdoor Voices ( smallish new company run by a young woman) and now they dropped them in favor of Nee Balance active – who’s designs are total rip offs of outdoor voices! Such a bummer.
Hmm I hadn’t thought about it that way. I don’t think NB’s designs are direct ripoffs of OV (or at least not like the Aritzia example above), but their aesthetic is definitely similar. It could also be that OV was the one who wanted to part ways rather than J Crew dropping them. Who knows.
It’s only semi-related, but I do think activewear has a cost problem. The more expensive (or, depending on your take, overpriced) an item is, the more enticing it is to copy because the price seems to correlate to the desirability.
I’m not sure, no matter who you are as a company, that $150+ for a pair of leggings to sweat in can really be called worth it. As long as we keep trying to push these things higher and higher into the “luxury” sphere, the more other companies will try to make the product “accessible.” I also don’t see it ending anytime soon, as prices continue to climb as the athleisure thing holds on.
I’d like to see brands focus on making good product at what is now the middle price point. I appreciate good creative design as much as the next person but the market for high end items like that is limited. Brands would be able to support themselves better if they had diffusion lines or just tried to make something more appealing/accessible to more people. When you start to think that Lululemon is affordable, you know your perspective has gotten skewed.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment Lauren!
My perspective on the cost issue… When you look at technical/performance gear of any kind, it *always* comes with a price tag no matter what the application. Whether it’s mountain biking or dance, specialty gear like that gets very expensive for quality products. The outdoor industry is also a good example. My waterproof shell from a reputable brand retailed for >$500 and that is a normal price for comparable products (fortunately I paid far less). Basically, when you’re selling a product that has to function and not just look cute/be trendy, your development costs are going to be much higher, which is going to be reflected in the price tag. It’s definitely not like normal fashion where you can throw together a pattern for a cute jacket out of whatever inexpensive material.
In other words, regardless of the upward creep in price points, I don’t think prices are out of hand (yet?) in the activewear market, particularly when you compare it with other technical niches. When you look at how many brands have been able to gain traction and experience growth even with their higher price points, I think that speaks to pretty strong demand in spite of price. In my experience, there’s a correlation between performance/quality and cost, at least for the most part (there are exceptions on both ends of the spectrum, of course), and I imagine many other people feel that way as well.
And all that said, I do think there are still healthy and growing options at moderate price points as well. Calia, Zella, Senita, VSX, Do Lyfe, Gymshark, and Fabletics (to name a few) are all good examples of brands producing a desirable product at attainable prices, and doing so with original designs rather than a lazy copy-and-paste from others. Although the high end is big right now, the mid-range is certainly alive and well!
Anyway, this became a bit of a novel, but what can I say, I like having these conversations. :) Thanks again for chiming in!
Sorry I may be the only person that feels this way but for many Alala prices are unattainable. This is the fashion industry and it happens. I have a degree in fashion design and its happened forever. Even during the days of Dior and Chanel. A lot of my college day designs were influenced from historical fashion. I mean think Uggs and Bear Paw. I own a lot of stuff from Forever 21 and Alala, and Michi, and Lululemon, and Target, and Alo, etc…obviously since I follow this blog I’m an active wear junkie and honestly each piece has its place in my closet. Where I draw the line is the situation with Werkshop where art work was taken and not changed at all. To me that’s like painting a replica of a Jackson Pollock painting and selling it as original. I’ve also had a really bad experience with Alala which forces me to never shop there again so I would buy a Forever 21 knock off and be totally ok with it. You know to each his/her own. I don’t judge anyone for having a fake louis vitton. I sure as heck wouldn’t judge someone for owning a Forever 21 Alala knock off.
Fake Louis Vuittons are made with forced child labor. People who own one should be judged.
Sorry to burst your bubble but lululemon was busted for child labor issues too
Yes, I (obviously) totally agree with you on the Lotus thing. Artwork is an especially bad example of shameless copying. And I definitely agree with you that copycats are nothing new. That said, in my opinion, just because it’s common in the industry doesn’t make it ok. I know that there will always be a market for low-price designs that capitalize on popular trends. And yes, there will definitely be a lot of overlap when certain design motifs are trending. But it’s one thing to sell mesh leggings that have a similar look to lulu’s tech mesh (like these: http://www.zappos.com/images/z/3/6/5/6/4/4/3656448-p-4x.jpg ), it’s another thing to mimic the EXACT shape and placement of the mesh. In my opinion, just because something is expensive doesn’t mean consumers are automatically entitled to that design at a more palatable price point. Even though I might like a $1000 pair of super hot shoes, I would rather buy an original design at a price I’m comfortable with rather than look for a lower cost knockoff. I’m ok with the fact that I can’t afford every stylish piece of fashion I might want and I don’t expect companies to copy someone else’s work just because I don’t have an unlimited budget.
In other words, I think there are ethical ways for fast fashion/low cost brands to offer stylish, trendy items at lower prices, but there are a lot of examples that *don’t* fall into that category, like the ones I highlighted here. So, that’s where I personally draw the line. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts and I enjoy the conversation, even if we don’t share all the exact same opinions. :)
Thanks so much for bringing this issue to light Suzanne. Nothing is more annoying than paying big bucks for a quality piece of athleticwear from Lululemon, & then walking in to Marshalls, or TJ Maxx & seeing the Kyodan, 90 Degree by Reflex, Marika, RBX etc brands with almost identical replicas of Lulu. Right down to the pattern, design etc. This makes me irate as I’m paying $100 for a tight from Lulu, & the next random person buys one very similar for $25 for almost the exact tight at Tj’s or Marshalls. I actually bought a spot on replica a few years ago from 90 degree that was a dupe of Lulus fatigue camo right down to the Lulu logo in the camo pattern. I couldn’t believe my eyes & had to buy to compare and sure enough a exact copy of the pattern. Now as we know the above brands do not hold a candle to Lulus designs, or quality, but it still drives me nuts that I’m paying top dollar for a unique design from Lulu & yet a dupe is available for far less. I seek out Lulus designs specifically for the functionality & uniqueness to each item I own. I am a walking billboard for Lulu & I just wish they’d go after these smaller companies as it’s an insult to us loyal customers whom spends thousands a year on their items for a reason. Thanks again Suzanne & hopefully this brings light to these other companies making dupes & riding on the originals coat tails. They should learn that no matter what, you cannot buy a Bentley on a Kia budget… I mean come on! Lmao
Actually, you bring up an interesting point with the fatigue camo example. It turns out that many brands, including lulu, will actually sell their extra product/material to direct-to-discount brands as a way to make a little bit of extra money rather than just throw that stuff away. I’m 99% sure this is exactly what happened with the 90 degrees camo and with the recent “blooming pixie” at TJ Maxx. That’s why I didn’t have a problem with the blooming pixie dupes because it appears that lulu sold it to them themselves! Craziness. Anyway, like you said, at least we’re ultimately getting a better quality product by buying the originals. :)
Thanks for writing this article! It’s perfectly articulated to bring awareness to an issue that gets many of us fired up and angry. You did an awesome job keeping it factual ;)
I’ve known about the Lotus Leggings issue for a couple of months and had some discussions with Jelena and Milena of ArthleticWear about what we can do about it… And it’s so hard to find a solution or to make changes behind the scenes that make it harder for people to steal designs. I don’t know the answer. :P
You seem to have a good amount of knowledge in this area, so maybe you have an opinion about an idea I had. Rather than patent designs of how the fabric is put together and whatnot, what about copyrighting the designs as drawings/digital artwork in the case of brands like ArthleticWear & Werkshop, where it’s an actual piece of art on the leggings? Do you think that would make a difference?
Thanks again! ;)
Aha!!! I knew I recognized those mermaid leggings on Lotus but I couldn’t for the life of me remember where I had seen them. Arthletic was it. Ugh. :( Thanks for reminding me with your comment though. :)
Patents have a couple potential pitfalls. The first is they are *very expensive* and time consuming to file. So if you have a brand like Arthletic or Werkshop who have many designs, it would cost tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) to cover their work adequately. Beyond that, my understanding is that design patents are very easy to weasel your way out of. So for example, Lotus changed a couple of minor details on the sugar skull leggings shown above. If Werkshop had a patent on that, I don’t think it would be very hard for Lotus to argue that they’re not violating Werkshop’s hypothetical patent because they made a handful of small changes. Not to mention, Lotus is based overseas, and litigating IP internationally is even more of a nightmare.
Wow, AWESOME article, thanks for writing it and getting the word out! I’ve been buying atheleisure for years but other than the Athleta/Kdeer problem, had no idea about any of the rest!
Thank you Jennifer!!! :) I’m glad you got something out of it.
Thanks for bringing attention to this most frustrating issue; I overheard my colleagues waxing on about fake Coach bags and how “crazy” it is to spend the money on a real one. ((Insert steam from my ears)). I explained that I spent 10 years in the apparel industry traveling to factories in Asia. The factories I visited were the superior factories (good lighting, clean, safe) but still fairly dismal by Western standards. I can only imagine the Factories that F21 or knock-off manufacturers use; their retail prices are less than my whsle cost so I can only imagine the sub-par and dangerous conditions the workers must face to produce goods at such “bargains”. At any rate, I highly recommend the documentary “The True Cost” – it’s very educational and you’ll feel more informed about your buying decisions. I think you’d really love it, since you appreciate quality and original design.
Ugh, I would cringe at that conversation too. It seems the more that consumers become disconnected from the supply side, the more people start to feel entitled to cheaper and cheaper prices, since there is zero visibility as to where those prices actually come from. Many people seem to think if one brand can sell clothes for cheap prices, everyone should be doing it and that anything else is just greed.
I definitely will watch The True Cost! I mean to this weekend but ran out of time. I won’t pretend to be the most informed or faultless consumer, but I’m slowly trying to increase my awareness and improve my habits. In general, I think supply chain visibility and ethical awareness is still very weak in active fashion even though nowadays there’s tons of options for it in mainstream fashion. I hope the responsibility arm of active fashion improves over time as the market continues to mature.
Absolutely! I think you’ve really hit the nail on the head with the premise of “The True Cost” – it doesn’t make you feel guilty but leads you to ask questions and be more conscious of your purchases. Everlane and Patagonia do a great job sharing their transparency with consumers – hopefully we will see more that in the future!
Thanks for your blog! Honest feedback and a great and informative read.
I normally like to buy from the original but even I won’t pay $135 for a pair of leggings. That is highway robbery. No wonder people look elsewhere. The fashion industry needs to be more reasonable.
I happen to disagree, but to each her own! There are a lot of costs associated with producing clothing (not *just* the cost of materials), so to me there are valid reasons that some brands would charge a higher price. Of course, they’re not *always* worth it, but I’m willing to pay for quality when I find it.
I’m a little late to this discussion, but I just wanted to thank you for writing this article. I’m a designer who is dealing with having my designs stolen left and right, and it’s incredibly disheartening. It’s important to me that someone be drawing attention to this issue.
This article also made me check out Lotus Leggings and in 2 minutes I’ve already found two copies of my designs. I am working to grow my currently very small business, and this blatant theft from large companies like Lotus Leggings is killing me:
My Tulipe Studio leggings: https://tulipestudio.com/yoga-leggings-colorful-geometric-print/
Lotus Leggings copy: https://www.lotusleggings.com/products/prisma-leggings?variant=34086162184
My Tulipe Studio leggings: https://tulipestudio.com/geometric-print-yoga-leggings-gems-print/
Lotus Leggings copy: https://www.lotusleggings.com/products/gemstone-leggings?variant=34089544456
I’ve spoken with a lawyer, who wasn’t very optimistic that there is much I can do about this. It’s beyond discouraging but it’s helpful to my soul to know that their are other voices out there speaking out about this. So thanks again, please keep it up.
Michele Valdez
Tulipe Studio
Ahhh Michele, I’m so sorry this is happening to you! I can imagine how disheartening it must be. I know that design theft is incredibly hard to enforce in the fashion world, but I hope that you continue to prosper and grow in spite of the unsavory attempts to undermine your efforts. I’ll continue doing my part to speak up in support of small businesses like yours. :)
I’ve worked as a designer in the fashion industry. Most of the pictures you’ve shown here appear to be knock-offs, but the problem with patenting fashion is that some of these unethical, big companies are patenting stuff that most of us have designed and manufactured far before they were even in existence. Besides, almost all designers/companies are influenced by and will implement the trends being shown in the fashion week runway shows and related. And as a designer you typically have fabric reps bringing you sample fabrics on a regular basis. It’s ridiculous to think the designer is supposed to try to find out if any other companies have purchased or released something in a similar pattern. Fashion follows trends, so there will be similarity. Even the fabrics follow certain trends and the reps will be bringing you fabrics that match those trends. If stylized rainbows are in trend, tons of manufacturers will weave that fabric.
And related to the clothing designs, putting block shapes into a yoga pant so it looks like shorts or so it has diagonal lines is NOT the invention of Alo or others. There are points in the body that are flattering to put lines and any good designer is going to do it. Putting a criss-cross band in a yoga pant waist has been done longer than I can remember and it is ridiculous when I see this being patented. When they claim IP on these basics it infringes on the creativity of new designers. In the long run, it will hurt the consumer. I’m not saying designs should be “stolen,” but rather these companies take it too far in their greed.
Knock-offs have been going on in the fashion industry longer than I’ve been alive. What happens is that customers who want better quality typically buy from the original designer/manufacturer. The knock-offs are rarely going to live up to the original. And now with the social media flooded with yoga celebrities wearing the “right” brand of yoga pants, a large segment of customers are going to pay to show they have the right “label.” Brand loyalty is the solution, not claiming rights to things they did not invent. (Sorry Alo Yoga, extra fabric in the ankles is something done repeatedly before you, despite what you might try to patent.)
I’m not condoning stealing but I think the more egregious actions are coming from these large entities. I have little sympathy for their lawsuits and complaints. Personally, I would probably never wear or buy anything from Alo, Lululemon and similar as their ethics are not in line with the type of business I want to support.
Thanks for such a thoughtful comment, Natalie! I agree with you that copyrighting / patent trolling is *not* a good solution here and it’s not something I want to condone. It seems like a way for larger companies with beefy legal budgets to throw their weight around to try to grab more market share by bleeding smaller companies out in court.
Also as you pointed out, there’s definitely a lot of grey area, especially when it comes to runway trends, and attempting to patent something simple like ruched leggings is silliness. I didn’t want to get into patenting in this post because it’s kind a whole other animal, as your comment definitely highlights. When it comes to copycatting, I try to look for a preponderance of evidence of bad behavior, e.g., multiple, non-obvious, not necessarily trend-driven designs.
Ultimately, my main goal is to raise awareness. Oftentimes consumers don’t know that what they’re purchasing is a ripoff, as you said. If some choose to still make that purchase, that’s certainly their prerogative, but I think it should be an informed decision. To echo what you said, I want consumers to choose what businesses support in a way that aligns with their values. To that end, I like to highlight things that stand out to me personally and let folks make their own decision from there.