After a much-hyped opening weekend, the tally is in on the Sex and the City movie: 

• mostly mediocre reviews,
• flocks of fans who couldn't care less about the mediocre reviews,
• twice the expected box office take, and
• Hollywood execs perennially perplexed at the presence of pink purchasing power. 

Whether or not, as a certain familiar opening voiceover suggests, "People come to New York looking for the two L's -- love and labels," Counterfeit Chic was amused by the followup metaphor:  "Turns out a knockoff is not as easy to spot when it comes to love."  This chick flick is nothing if not genuinely brand-friendly, the cameo role of an unlabeled vintage suit notwithstanding.  SATC even offers (repeatedly) one of my usual bits of advice for the aspiring fashionista who simply must have a designer label but can't afford to buy it -- namely, rent. 

Of course, any lucrative transition to the big screen gives rise to the suspicion that the creators of the sharp, observant original show have sold out to the masses.  Nostalgia for Meet Me in Saint Louis?  An apartment hunt based on following a white guy with a baby -- without irony?  Still, SATC includes one truly authentic moment, in which the writers' real attitude shines through.  After ordering a round of cosmopolitans, one of the gang of four wonders aloud why they ever stopped drinking the show's signature pink cocktail.  The answer?  "Because everyone else started." 

P.S.  Speaking of lack of originality, it seems that Sarah Jessica Parker's borrowed finery for the NYC premiere had already taken a turn on the red carpet -- to the dismay of the actress.  Despite the constant comparisons of the ready-to-wear era, enhanced by internet immediacy ("Who Wore It Best?" "Fashion Faceoff"), style-savvy stars still want to project a unique image.  In this case, however, there's something appropriate about a TV trendsetter celebrating her movie adaptation in a second-time-around gown. 

Sarah Jessica Parker (left) in Nina Ricci by Olivier Theyskens; Lauren Santo Domingo with the designer.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 11:39 PM | Permalink

Are you a Betty or a Veronica? 

In the opening story of the June 2008 Betty & Veronica Digest Magazine, the longtime rivals for Archie's affections become mutually unwilling mirror images.  Betty's defense?  "Don't look at me like that!  I just bought it, I didn't manufacture it!"  Even the end of the school day fails to bring relief, as the girls stomp off to a pep rally -- in identical cheerleader uniforms. 

It may look like a children's comic book, but for my USD $2.49, it's a pretty sophisticated commentary on originality and social conformity.  After all, true wisdom comes from recognizing that all of life is just a reiteration of high school. 

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 08:55 PM | Permalink

In times past, a fashionista who contemplated attending a comicon would be tempted to duck into a phone both to change, lest her fellow style mavens suspect her secret identity as an associate of comic book geeks, science fiction fans, and other permanently adolescent males.  However unfair the stereotype -- most avid graphic novel readers have met a girl, and a growing number actually are girls -- hanging out with the comic crowd wasn't exactly a recipe for social success.

This season, however, none other than Vogue's Anna Wintour has declared the arrival of superhero chic.  The Met's Costume Institute Gala, co-chaired by Anna herself along with Giorgio Armani, George Clooney, and Julia Roberts, will take place among displays of high fashion influenced by comic book characters.  Mere mortals will no doubt flock to the exhibit for months afterward. 

The Met has, naturally, taken the opportunity to encourage donations by sending out preview literature from the exhibit, including this photo of a Bernhard Willhelm look from Spring 2006.  It's not clear exactly which nefarious ubervillain might have found a way to melt Superman's shield, but judging from the choice of trim underscoring the trademark, Counterfeit Chic suspects the Infringer, whose choice of weapon is the deadly pun ray.  Pugnacious parodies, Batman! 

Of course, we need not worry about the Man of Steel.  He's more than capable of defending against crimes of fashion if necessary -- a good thing, since D.C. Comics' lawyers have had their hands full with other matters lately.

As for me, I'm off to the New York Comic Con's panel on "Comics, Concepts, and Copyrights" this afternoon at 2pm.  See you there!

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 06:53 AM | Permalink

As every good hunter or fisherman knows, the right bait can be crucial to landing a catch.  In the 1955 Hitchcock film To Catch a Thief, Grace Kelly suspects Cary Grant of being a not-quite-reformed jewel thief masquerading as an Oregon businessman -- and baits her trap accordingly.  When Grant reveals his true identity by identifying Kelly's stunning "diamond" necklace as a fake, the victorious huntress leans forward and breathes, "Well, I'm not."  Fireworks ensue.  Literally.

Diamonds may be some girls' best friend, but for the future Princess Grace, rhinestones did the job just fine.  One can only imagine how well she'd have managed with access to a ready supply of the new "manufactured" diamonds -- or whatever they'll ultimately be called in the marketplace.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 08:27 AM | Permalink

Are the small screen toils and triumphs of Project Runway's aspiring designers already fading from memory?  Then check out this report on Project Lameway, a San Francisco charity event sponsored by vintage emporium Retrofit to benefit Creativity Explored.  Not only did Nina, Michael, and Heidi lookalikes show up to judge the designs, but "Tim Gunn" was on hand to offer advice and encouragement. 

With some of the buzz around the show fading, backwards-writing contestant Elisa Jimenez mischievously noting that "runway" reversed reads a sleepy "yawnur," and even finalist Jillian Lewis telling WWD that the producers need to "change the format or something" to maintain interest, at least the parody version will offer a few surprises. 

As for Counterfeit Chic, it's definitely time to turn off the TV and get back to work!

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 08:50 PM | Permalink

Mirabile dictu -- a TV show got the law right! 

As law students who thought their careers would play out like a television sitcom or even a John Grisham novel quickly realize, law in the world of fiction and law in the real world bear little relation to one another.  After all, how easy is it to dramatize document production or the rule against perpetuities?  Every now and then, however, a smart writer captures not only the spirit of the law but its letter -- as in this week's episode of Lipstick Jungle. 

Counterfeit Chic readers are aware that both the original novel and the TV series include a subplot in which fashion designer Victory Ford has her work copied.  The small screen version reaches a climax in episode 105 when Victory sees a group of her sketches (secretly appropriated by a former assistant) already produced and displayed on mannequins in a department store window -- under the label of one Ricardo Bragini.  When the distraught Victory calls on her posse for support the next morning, one blithely suggests calling a lawyer, only to be informed that U.S. copyright does not apply to fashion designs. 

Naturally, Victory isn't going to let a little thing like the law's refusal to stop the theft of fashion designs prevent her from confronting the guilty parties.  To watch the episode in its entirety, including a dramatically ripped dress and Bragini's villainously cool response to Victory, visit the Lipstick Jungle website.

Of course, the real star of the show -- the strapless, empire waist babydoll dress in question -- is probably too basic to qualify for protection even under a more advanced legal regime.  But don't tell the show's stylist.  A trade secret is a trade secret, after all. 

Related posts:  Law of the Lipstick Jungle and Law of the Lipstick Jungle, Part 2

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 07:20 PM | Permalink

Anton Chekov famously noted that if you hang a gun on the wall in the first act, you'd better fire it by the last.  It seems that the writers of the ABC television series Lipstick Jungle were listening. 

After introducing a dishonest assistant who appropriates her boss's work in episode 2, the preview for episode 5, "Dressed to Kill," shows fashion designer Victory Ford discovering her protege's perfidy. 

We'll have to wait until March 6, when the episode airs in the U.S., to find out what happens.  Until then, two words of advice from the jurisprudential jungle:  noncompetition agreement.

Related post:  Law of the Lipstick Jungle

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 01:57 PM | Permalink

Sunday's Oscar parties are over and the Monday hangovers have faded, but knockoff artists are still hanging around and sniffing at the leftover crumbs from the fashion banquet.  A Cachet copyist immediately revealed his top targets to WWD, and now the notorious Faviana label has named its own fashion victims, including two of the same dresses as Cachet.  

In addition to seeking secondhand publicity via Access Hollywood, Faviana has gone to great lengths to make sure that the models for its copied samples resemble the actresses who wore the original gowns to the Academy Awards -- or at least their morning-after incarnations.  Imagine Katherine Heigl with her curls gone flat and her roots showing, Jessica Alba with her bodice feathers bedraggled, Miley Cyrus haphazardly smearing lipstick around her mouth after partying with the grownups, or Amy Adams with shiny skin and an extra dessert under her belt, and you'll get the picture.  Or if your mind's eye refuses to conjure such wreckage, just scroll down: 

Girls, don't let these be your post-prom pictures -- just say no! 

And while the fashion police ponder these aesthetic offenses, does the legal system have anything to say for itself?  The gowns, of course, are unprotected by U.S. law -- but the photos may be subject to copyright.  Since Faviana is clearly using them for a commercial purpose, the company had better have sent its own photographer to snap these red carpet shots -- or at least licensed their use.  Even that wouldn't leave Faviana home free, however, if the actresses in question object to their images being used to hock fashion schlock.  Some of these leading ladies are reportedly paid a pretty penny to appear in the real thing, and it's unlikely that any one of them would agree to pose for a Faviana ad or to deputize a double to do so.  Perhaps the fashion houses can't take direct action against blatant copyists -- but there's nothing to say that they can't persuade their lovely mannequins to do so. 

For the moment, however, sweatshop season is in full swing -- and Counterfeit Chic has another pressing question to ponder.  Have I spent too much time staring at various trademarks, or (no offense to the charming and talented Proenza Schouler boys here) does the bodice of Amy Adams' gown recall the silhouette of Mickey Mouse? 

Many thanks to Steven Kolb for the links!

UPDATE:  Some wise words from Professor Rebecca Tushnet:

You know I respect your work, even if we may disagree on some things.  So I hope you'll take this as a friendly question:  did you really have to suggest that the decidedly skinny model in the last Faviana picture was fat?  Aside from accuracy -- and I admit, I don't follow fashion and I don't see such huge differences between the glowing stars and the nameless models -- I wish you wouldn't suggest that having an extra dessert is a problem.  When I see something like that, I have to wonder how fat you think I am and what you think that means about my moral standing.  Criticize the copyists all you want.  But it's hard for me to read attacks on the models for being, in my eyes, a perfectly reasonable -- skinny actually -- shape. 

And a response:

Point taken, Rebecca -- you're quite right, esp. with the skinny model debate and issues involving eating disorders in the industry and among the young women it influences still unresolved.  The model certainly isn't fat or even particularly curvy, though as I looked at the picture, I didn't like the shape created by the belt on the copy -- a straight belt or waistband in general is apt to create a strange tummy bulge even on a thin person where a curved belt or waistband won't (but requires more fabric and care in construction).

There's no moral implication about extra dessert, though -- just make mine chocolate.  I was  thinking of the various ways in which one's carefully constructed look can degrade over the course of an evening out -- mussed hair, lipstick re-applied after a few drinks, the need to loosen the belt after a gourmet dinner, etc. -- and I still find it amusing that the knockoff company tried to find doubles for the actresses but did such a sloppy job of styling them. 

Still, there are too many attacks on women based on unrealistic standards of body shape and size, and I don't mean for this post to be taken as one of them.  For the record, womanly curves and angles are both fine, and healthy is the ultimate ideal.  Thanks for the reminder that we're not yet living in a world where we can take that for granted.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 12:48 AM | Permalink

With so many actresses playing it safe at the Oscars, it was a lean year for the red carpet scavengers seeking knockoff fodder. 

Michael Ruff of Cachet, however, has gone on record with WWD about his top targets.  Naturally, there will be long red dresses -- a trend that will be noted by real designers seeking inspiration and design pirates alike.  The soon-to-be Cachet copies include Heidi Klum's John Galliano, Anne Hathaway's Marchesa (red carpet bait as soon as it came down the runway; it was just a matter of which actress), and Katherine Heigl's Escada:

The company also announced plans to replicate Jessica Alba's aubergine Marchesa (though presumably not in pregnant proportions), as well as Jennifer Garner's Oscar de la Renta and Penelope Cruz's Chanel:

Ruff may be barking up another tree, though, if Harvey Weinstein, the movie mogul and now spouse of Marchesa co-designer Georgina Chapman, hears about his plans.  Last year, when another manufacturer boasted of his intent to copy a Marchesa straight off the red carpet (this one, perhaps?), Weinstein played the good boyfriend and beat up the guy called his extremely famous trial lawyer.  Somehow, the would-be copyist changed his mind.  Now Cachet claims it's going to copy two Marchesas...

The copying is, of course, legal in the U.S. -- at the moment.  Perhaps Harvey's bulldog invoked trade dress protection, since the dress was immediately famous; perhaps he considered the probability of distribution to a foreign jurisdiction where the copying might be actionable; perhaps he simply threatened to dog the copyist's footsteps with various legal challenges for the rest of his natural life.  Whatever the tactics, they're unlikely to be successful -- or even available -- in most cases.

For the moment, then, Cachet is simply cackling over its Academy Awards loot and calculating its prom-season profits.  The beading and other details on some of the gowns are too expensive to copy, Ruff notes, "But with the others, especially the one-shoulder dresses, we will be able to do something more exact."

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 08:13 AM | Permalink

It's not a good season for powerful, high-achieving women.  The buzz has gone out of Hillary Clinton's campaign, leaving one to wonder how the first serious shot at nominating a woman for President could seem, well, boring.  And the two TV shows vying to be worthy successors to Sex and the City, but with elite career women as the main characters -- Cashmere Mafia and Lipstick Jungle -- seem to play the crying game as often as Hillary in New Hampshire.  And New Haven.  And....

Behind the veil of televised tears, however, there is one plotline of potential interest to Counterfeit Chic.  In the original Lipstick Jungle novel, a flashback shows the fashion designer character facing down a copyist early in her career before going on to fame and fortune.  In the TV version, the designer, Victory Ford, has all but lost her business -- and, as a final parting gesture, her assistant rips pages from Victory's sketchbook and presents them as her own at a new job. 

As of episode 2, the designer hadn't yet discovered her assistant's treachery.  When she does, however, will she have any legal recourse?   

Since the designer told the assistant to "take anything you want," it might be difficult to argue that the pages were stolen.  And since the assistant didn't trace the designs but simply took the pages, there's no copyright issue.  As for the assistant presenting the sketches as part of her own portfolio, and telling her new employer that she'd actually been the design force behind the Victory Ford label, she could lose her job for essentially lying about her resume -- but that's up to her new boss, not her old one.  If the designs were actually produced by the new employer and were so recognizable that the public assumed they were Victory's work, the designer could have a trade dress argument -- but it would be an extremely weak one.  How could the public be confused as to the origin of specific designs it had never seen? 

In some non-US legal systems, however, Victory Ford could call on her lawyers to take action against her former assistant.  As the artist responsible for the sketches, Victory would be entitled to have them attributed to her and not to someone else.  Moreover, turning the sketches into clothing -- making 3D copies -- would be actionable as well, since fashion designs are subject to protection in the EU, Japan, India, etc. 

Presumably the story will be continued in future episodes of Lipstick Jungle.  Whether Victory is ultimately victorious or not, however, she's certain to cry. 

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 10:34 AM | Permalink

Every year, sales of Super Bowl memorabilia total over $100 million.  That's a lot of T-shirts -- and a major magnet for counterfeiters.

According to an article in the New York Times, federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials headed to Arizona in advance of football's big game to sweep up fake tees and tickets, and even a $2,000 counterfeit jersey allegedly signed by members of the Patriots' offense. 

Happily for Giants fans, their opponents' celebrated offensive line turned out to be almost as flimsy as the jersey. 

P.S.  For more on the Patriots and false -- or at least overly optimistic -- trademarks, check out The Trademark Blog's just slightly gloating commentary.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 11:48 PM | Permalink

These days Spiderman comic fans are (more or less) relieved to see their favorite superhero looking his red-and-blue best.  Over the past weeks, however, a Marvel comics crossover series entitled Civil War has seen Spidey, a.k.a. Peter Parker, unmasked and imitation Scarlet Spiders wearing copies of a new suit designed especially for the original webspinner.  Needless to say, our khaki-clad hero was not happy: 

Not only did Spiderman refuse to take this sartorial offense sitting down, he even invoked the power of intellectual property law in his defense:

The choice of copyright law is an interesting one here.  Apparel in general is not eligible for copyright protection, although some costume elements -- surface designs, for example, or fanciful masks -- may qualify.  In the case of the new spider suit, however, the garment includes so many functional elements that patent protection might be more appropriate.  Alternatively, Spiderman may have a right of publicity claim against the imposters, since they've attempted to replicate his personna.

Of course, Spiderman is correct in one sense:  Unless we suspend disbelief and enter his virtual world, he's just a 2-dimensional drawing --  and thus subject to copyright protection (and, on other grounds, to trademark protection as well).  Not that this would hamper Marvel artists in their decision to copy his suit for other Marvel characters.  But don't expect D.C. Comics' Superman to be borrowing the web design any time soon.

Back in Peter Parker's world, even thugs aren't impressed by the Scarlet Spiders' attempt to copy the costume and to steal Spiderman's image:

Which only goes to show that while there may be honor among thieves, (intellectual property) thieves are accorded very little honor. 

P.S.  Should anyone else out there be thinking about knocking off Spiderman, think again.  I've met Spidey's lawyer, and while I've never seen him climb walls or spin webs, he definitely rocks.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 10:21 PM | Permalink

Were the Project Runway judges on last week's episode blinded by the bedazzling on Season 4 contestant Victorya Hong's winning prom dress (right)?  Jennifer at Jezebel.com, who noted the similarity between Victorya's design and a dress designed by PR Season 3 finalist Mychael (formerly Michael) Knight (left), thinks so. 

Of course, the jeweled neckline also resembles that of Season 3 designers Kayne Gillaspie and Robert Best for Miss USA, Tara Conner (below).  Could it be that Victorya, rather than inadvertently copying Mychael, has cleverly nailed the judges' style?  Or adapted a general trend?  Or perhaps simply tapped into our collective desire to see the same thing over and over again, but with a twist --the pushmipullyu psychological phenomenon explored by Murketing genius Rob Walker in his latest Consumed column? 

Whatever the source of the resemblance between Victorya's and Mychael's dresses, at least the desire of Project Runway viewers for a seasonal copying scandal has been satisfied.  For a walk down memory lane, check out the duplicative moments from Season 3 and Season 2. 

And in the meantime, sign me Counterfyt Chic. 

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 12:06 AM | Permalink

What cosmic counterfeiting conspiracy has compelled mention of Britney on this page twice in a month?  It's a vision best avoided -- as is Britney Spears' 2005 video "Do Something," which features the singer and friends in a flying pink Hummer upholstered in Louis Vuitton Murakami cherry blossoms.  Counterfeit, of course.

A French court has levied a fine of 80,000 euros (nearly USD $120,000) against Sony BMG and its subsidiary Zomba Label Group, as well as MTV Online, which displayed the clip on its website.  In addition, the court ordered the video removed from distribution, including via the internet, with additional fines of 1,000 euros per day until the companies do so. 

At that rate, Britney could've hired Takashi Murakami to draw the flowers personally....

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 04:26 PM | Permalink

Britney may have fallen low on the celebrity food chain -- and even been accused of carrying a fake bag herself -- but who knew that she would be endorsing counterfeits on YouTube? Check out "her" brazen new video before it disappears.

Truth be told, PerfectionBags' videography may be more self-aware, and offer more commentary on consumer culture, than the original. Not that it's legal or anything.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 10:30 PM | Permalink

If you've taught your children to read using brightly colored shopping bag logos or spent more on the latest diaper bag than on the babysitter's salary, there's a new developmental toy for your beloved accessories offspring.  Check out Atypyk's new wooden peg puzzle, featuring baby's first brands, a bargain at only USD $32.10.

Of course, the French company's luxury edition will no doubt replace American fashion, fast food, technology, and porn with continental counterparts -- priced accordingly. 

Via Core77. 

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 11:04 PM | Permalink

"V" is an anarchist revolutionary created by graphic artist Alan Moore and also the title character in a Warner Brothers film (logo, left).  Now, it would seem, he's selling hair products. 

Hey, it's a living.  But why, exactly, would you want to encourage the anarchic tendencies of your tresses?

Via Newsarama and Kung Fu Rodeo.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 08:55 AM | Permalink

For modern celebrities, talent is optional.  Having a catchphrase is not.

This phenomenon has let to the trademarking of any number of short phrases, including Paris Hilton's, "That's hot!"  She holds or has applied for registration of the phrase in several categories of goods, including clothing, electronic devices such as cell phones, and alcoholic beverages -- in other words, everything a girl needs for a night out.  (Readers will be relieved to know that the scope of the clothing registration includes underwear.) 

Today the Smoking Gun reports that Ms. Hilton has sued Hallmark, alleging that one of its greeting card designs not only misappropriates her image for commercial purposes in violation of her rights of publicity but also infringes her trademark. 

Not so hot for Hallmark.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 12:24 PM | Permalink

If you're going to make an omelette, you've got to break a few eggs. 

And if you're going to make a TV commercial in which a determinedly stylish woman saws off the right heel of a brand-new, red-soled pair of pumps in order to wear them while driving her BMW, you've got to ruin a few Louboutins.  Or do you?

Take a look at the commercial, then examine the frame above.  As satisfied as our ruthless fashionista looks with her new purchase, the shopping bag is a knockoff.  Real Christian Louboutin bags are indeed a color close to grocery bag brown (remember paper bags?  the evil tree killers that were replaced by more virtuous plastic bags, before they too became public enemies?), with a subtle tone-on-tone horizontal stripe.  However, Louboutin bags have the designer's logo printed in white on both sides.  Moreover, the real things have white rope handles, not ribbons. 

The shoes themselves are a tougher call.  The logo on the insole is unreadable, even magnified and sharpened (hi-def, anyone?).  Its shadowy form doesn't match the printing that would appear on a real Louboutin insole, in most cases consisting of the designer's name and the word "Paris" in gold.  It's possible that the logos in the ad were deliberately obscured, either manually or digitally.  The insole of the shoe in the model's left hand, in particular, is suspiciously dark in the middle where the logo should be. 

That leaves us with the signature red soles, an immediate indicator of the master's work -- except when they're not. 

So, real or fake?  At a visceral level, I'd like to think that the shoe in the ad is a knockoff, and that the horrified reaction of shoe-loving viewers is mere media manipulation.  After all, the bag is fake, and destroying a few copies while filming would be much less expensive than sawing through heel after heel of the real thing.

On the other hand, one estimate sets the average cost of producing a 30-second commercial at USD $350,000.  In addition, the price of air time during the last Superbowl reportedly topped $2.5 million.  With that kind of budget, why not go for the expensive thrill rather than the cheap one?

If actual Louboutin pumps were harmed in the making of this commercial, however, why would BMW change the bag and obscure the logos?  One possibility is to focus viewer attention on only the most relevant details, namely the red soles and the BMW logo.  A more likely reason, however, would be that Louboutin didn't give permission for his logo to appear in the ad, which essentially elevates the car over the shoes as an object of desire -- not exactly an intelligent designer endorsement. 

As for the red soles, they're not registered trademarks.  Yet.   

Postscript to ad folks:  OK, you've succeded in getting at least one woman to notice a car commercial.  However, the action is so eyebrow-raising (yes, really) that I watched the ad several times before remembering what make of car was involved, and even now I couldn't name the model.  Just in case you were wondering.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 11:26 PM | Permalink

As a law professor, very few of my professional engagements require false eyelashes. 

On Friday, however, I taped a segment of the Tyra Banks Show on -- what else? -- fake fashion, and her talented hair and makeup team definitely raised the glamor quotient beyond the usual academic levels.  I can't reveal the details of the show yet, but after watching Tyra, you may never look at a Gucci bag the same way again.

The episode will air this fall; I'll keep you posted on the specific date. 

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 07:36 PM | Permalink

After one fashion assistant's roman a clef became a best-selling novel and a hit movie, knockoffs inevitably followed.  The lastest entry is The Fashionista Diaries, a reality TV show that drops 6 interns into Fashionworld, including the offices of soon-to-fold Jane magazine. 

One of you will have to tell me if there are any featured fakes, since after 20 minutes of manufactured enthusiasm, awkward on-the-job flirting, and staged performance reviews, I doubt I'll tune in again.  In the meantime, one intern has already declared her allegiance to knockoffs in her online profile:

Right now, I'm loving my Steven by Steve Madden black patent leather Mary Janes --- because they look like Manolos!

Well, maybe. 

The Steve Madden shoes that most closely resemble both those on said intern's feet and the beautifully balanced creations of Manolo Blahnik (left) are the "Vyxen" style (right) -- but the master has little to fear.  Apart from issues of craftsmanship, placement of straps is a tricky matter.  Perfect location highlights the instep and makes arch reference to the flat, round-toed Mary Janes of childhood; a too-high strap merely shortens and widens the leg.  Unfortunate -- but internships are about learning, I suppose.

There is one good thing to come out of the not-terribly-revolutionary show, however:  great ad graphics. 

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 12:24 PM | Permalink

At the Swarovski crystal-studded and carbon-neutral CFDA Fashion Awards this evening, the fashion was real -- even if one of the celebrities was fake. 

Your humble blogger almost spilled her champagne laughing when, in a nod to the organization's continuing legislative efforts to fight knockoffs, an Ellen DeGeneres impersonator took the stage to present the Accessories Award.  MADtv's Nicole Parker wore a white pantsuit reminiscent of Ellen's Oscar attire and draped authentic handbags designed by nominees Derek Lam, Marc Jacobs, and Michael Kors around her neck and over her arms.  Happily for winner Derek Lam, the statuette was genuine as well. 

Congratulations to Derek and all of the other honorees -- and to the CFDA on the 25th anniversary of the Fashion Awards.  (Just don't call them the fashion Oscars -- unless you're speaking Italian.)

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 01:09 AM | Permalink

Apparently our stylish canine companions aren't satisfied with copycat accessories anymore.  Now they're demanding couture knockoffs -- and Little Lilly is ready to oblige, with a "Red Carpet Collection" for polished and pampered pets. 

Does your dog fancy herself a JLo type in bejeweled "Marchesa"?  If not, how about a version of Nicole's Balenciaga, Penelope's Versace, or Reese's Nina Ricci?  And your little stud will surely make an impression at the dog park in "The Leo," an elegant tuxedo sans bow tie.  One wonders, naturally, about the gowns that didn't make the cut -- presumably the real dogs here.

Is all of this legal?  The outfits, certainly.  If the designers can't prevent the creation of knockoffs for two-legged fans, they won't be able to control the four-legged versions.  The use of celebrity photographs?  Probably not, unless the photos are licensed and their subjects have agreed to the use of their images to sell doggie duds.  And the golden image of Oscar himself?  Once again, not likely.

Still, the costumes alone are a revealing monument to capitalist culture -- and a whole new way of worshiping the "bitch-goddess, success."

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 02:06 PM | Permalink

Amid this morning's post-Oscar chatter about which gowns were so safe as to be almost knockoffs themselves and which ones are likely to be knocked off for prom season, here's a look at a celebrity knockoff from an earlier era:

Peanuts, 11 April 1951

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 07:39 PM | Permalink

Just in time for Valentine's Day, Kay Jewelers is running a 15-second spot in which an adorable little moppet turns to counterfeiting in order to impress his equally tiny girlfriend:

If this were a public service announcement rather than a jewelry commercial, the next scene might involve federal agents jumping out from the bushes next to little Mandy's front door and arresting young Charlie for his crime of passion -- or at least our besotted protagonist going home to find a C&D letter from the nice lawyers at Kay Jewelers.

But would Charlie have a defense?

If the charges involved criminal counterfeiting, Charlie might argue that his lovingly handwritten "Kay" trademark was neither "identical with" nor "substantially indistinguishable from" the real trademark.  Moreover, he was arguably not trafficking in counterfeit goods -- unless Mandy's kiss could be construed as valuable consideration for the delivery.

In the realm of civil offenses, Charlie might have a more difficult time attempting to prove that his trademark did not create a "likelihood of confusion."  Same name, same type of packaging, same category of product -- how much does it matter that Kay Jewelers usually goes with commercial printing over crayon?  Perhaps a survey of Mandy and her friends would be in order here.

As for copyright, Kay can certainly protect its original jewelry designs under U.S. law -- but we have no evidence at present that Charlie's paper-and-glitter heart pendant was substantially similar to Kay's diamond baubles. 

So what will be the fate of our little Charlie?  The young lad's life has clearly reached a crossroads.  He may grow up to be a successful jewelry designer, inspired by the material evidence of his parents' affection for one another and the memory of his first love.  If he learns the wrong lesson, however, he may one day find himself in court, accused of trademark infringement or worse.

Whether Charlie's ending proves happy or tragic, Kay Jewelers has certainly captured a moment -- and planted the seed of a Cupid-worthy drama.

Maybe it would be safer to just go with flowers.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 12:18 PM | Permalink

Knockoff artists make a substantial profit on copying creative designers' hottest looks straight off the runway, thus skipping both the process of developing new looks and the expense of creating and marketing an entire line.  But how do they know which items the fashion press -- and more importantly, the consumer -- will anoint as this year's must-have pieces? 

Ugly Betty, ABC television's knockoff of the Columbian telenovela Yo soy Betty, la fea, offers a fictionalized version of how discount chain "Century 21 Eternal 18" sneaks a peek in to the fashion pack's seasonal fetishes:

Of courses, the Mode staffer's scam isn't actually criminal -- unless the scheme is to steal the item itself.  But why settle for a clandestinely emailed photo or two when you could build a whole subplot around getting hold of "it"?

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 03:01 PM | Permalink

For most of you, it's the holiday season.

For academic types, it's exam season.  My students are (presumably!) studying for exams, I've been composing exams, and I have a stack of term papers on my desk, all ready for the red pen.  (Actually, I usually use green.  Red ink makes the papers look a bit too much like I've attacked them with a stiletto -- as in knife, not shoe.)

However, a study break is in order -- not just to celebrate Hanukkah (with whatever combination of h's, ch's, and k's you prefer), but also to shop for last-minute gifts and festive apparel.  If you're in New York, head down to Emmett McCarthy's Nolita boutique, EMc2, tonight to meet Chloe Dao of Project Runway Season 2 fame, or on Tuesday to meet America's dean of fashion, Tim Gunn. 

In between, drop by Kelima K's nearby boutique for limited-edition dresses or -- if the holiday season has prompted a long-awaited proposal -- a made-to-measure wedding gown.  Kelima's creations are so cleverly draped that they're virtually impossible to knock off, but more on that another day.  In the meantime, good things come in 3's:

Happy holidays!

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 05:25 PM | Permalink

incredible (adj.)

1.  so extraordinary as to seem impossible

2.  not credible; hard to believe; unbelievable

The following message, featuring superhero Captain Rochester and villain Count DerFitter, was created by Hatchling and Rochester Electronics "to clearly illustrate the potential disastrous result of a counterfeit device in a critical application." 

The incredible part?  Captain Rochester is a knockoff of writer/director Brad Bird's Mr. Incredible, right down to the theme music.  Lest you doubt, check out the tags accompanying the clip on YouTube.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 08:58 PM | Permalink

Apparently the Coca-Cola company's ideal woman prefers her fashion accessories real but is willing to fake her, er, other sensory experiences.  What better to fuel this fabulous lifestyle than the latest version of the Totally Artificial Beverage?  (No, that's not the official explanation of the name, but if the shoe fits....)  Pity that pink beverages went out of style with the finale of Sex and the City.

Click here for the full-page ad.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 08:34 PM | Permalink

Channel your inner Edna Mode with this superhero costume contest from Project Rooftop!  You redesign and don one of the classics, and if you win, graphic artist Dean Trippe will make your three-dimensional dream a 2D reality:

Does the contest promote the creation of potentially copyright-infringing derivative works or the unauthorized use of trademarks in superhero characters?  Well, probably.  But like fan fiction, the contest entries are more likely to benefit than harm the holders of rights in the original works.  (Just beware of engaging in commercial production.)  And for more on copyright in costumes themselves, click here.

Many thanks to Marty Schwimmer over at The Trademark Blog for this Halloween treat!

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 06:52 PM | Permalink

Radar's Dale Hrabi has "discovered" the inspiration for some of this season's most horrible handbags -- in horror movies.  Below is Exhibit F, one of seven sartorial creations that bear strange resemblence to cinematic creatures:

Copyright concerns?  Hardly -- even if Radar had tapped designers' secret source of new styles, any actual copying would be too minimal to raise the spectre of infringement of the moviemakers' right to prepare derivative works.  And while I'm not an expert on extraterrestrial rights, I doubt that this Predator could claim rights of publicity with respect to his (her? its?) image. 

So banish the ghoulish rules, and get to work on accessorizing your Halloween costume!

Many thanks to my creative Georgetown student David Barzelay for the link.

Posted by Susan Scafidi at 09:48 PM | Permalink