Fashion industry copyright news
Date: 25th February, 2010
This article by intellectual property lawyer Jeanine Rizzo from the Intellectual Property law department discusses the latest copyright infringement case filed in Germany. The case concerns an item of clothing, and the article subsequently discusses how fashion is protected by IP.
The article was published on the Times of Malta, Business Section.
Copy-wrongs
In the fast-paced world of Hollywood and LA Record Labels, even the most cautious producers and directors get caught for copyright infringement. It’s not just a swift and hard rap on the knuckles that’s meted out in punishment, but big money lawsuits for damages and the shame of being labelled a copyright infringer.
For the horror lies in the fact that, when exposed, the public is made aware that one’s presumed “creativity” is uncovered as being a copy of pre-existing work. An artist strives to present their own vision to the world, thereby building a whole persona represented by their work and by the way in which they portray themselves. This explains the lure and the huge success of artists like Lady Gaga, with her fantastical costumes. In fact musicians are extremely focused on presenting themselves as a “complete package” – music, styling, way of life, the works.
This brings us to the very recent German case for copyright infringement filed by the underwear and bikini producers Triumph against music giant Sony. The main focus of the controversy is a bikini worn by Beyonce in her latest video produced and distributed by Sony (a collaboration with Lady Gaga in fact) for the song “Video Phone”. Triumph claim that their copyright in the bikini has been infringed when a copy of it was worn by Beyonce in the video.
The original design for Triumph is one by Iskren Lozanov, a Bulgarian designer who created this very striking black and white bikini inspired by Picasso. The bikini in question is embellished with large cartoon-like features, some of which hang off the bikini as though they were hanging off a belt, and includes sunglasses and bracelets to match. Sony’s defence was that both were inspired by Picasso, yet where wholly different. A Munich Court has upheld Triumph’s injunction and has barred Sony from airing the video in Germany ruling that the bikini sported by Beyonce is an unauthorised reproduction of the highly original Lozanov design.
Sony have therefore been found guilty of copyright infringement for the costume worn in a video – however sources say that Sony are likely to appeal. This is not the first time designers have sued to protect their work – however in truth, there aren’t as many suits as one would expect. A famous case is that by the late YSL who sued Ralph Lauren in French Courts in 1994 for copying his famous “tuxedo dress” and was awarded damages.
Designs are protected by Copyright as an artistic work. Furthermore, the Registered (RCD) and Unregistered (UCD) Design Rights protect fashion designs in Malta and at European Union level. The RCD protects designs for 5 years renewable to a maximum of 25 years for designs which are new and have individual character, while the UCD gives a 3 year “automatic” protection.
When looking realistically at the fashion world and the trends it churns out every 6 months, the argument in favour of a RCD slips away. It takes a number of months for an application for a RCD to be examined by the Intellectual Property Offices, and by the time the right is granted, people would have moved on to the next season’s trend. Ah, but what about Classics, like the Little Black Dress, or the Chanel suit? Or what about something so different and striking, such as Lozanov’s bikini? These have either shaped fashion trends for decades, becoming a staple part of our fashion vocabulary or are so unique that they remain imprinted in one’s memory and have the potential of becoming iconic pieces. For these extraordinary cases the RCD makes more sense.
The 3 years’ “automatic” protection given via the UCD protects against deliberate copying. There are no fees or waiting times involved, and this suits designers better. For example, in January last year, UK designer Karen Millen sued Dunnes stores for copying some of its clothes and won the case on infringement of the UCD.
The truth of the matter is that now everyone is talking about Lozanov’s bikini. This serves as the best example of the argument that copying popularises trends.
However, in the creative economy where one exploits one’s own intellectual creations in order to build a career and subsist, then imitation is no form of flattery, but theft!
http://www.timesofmalta.com/business/view/20100225/features/of-copyrights-and-wrongs
