Coping with copying
Two conflicting words fake and creative sit side by side in a perfectly chaotic yet creative universe of fashion.
Design plagiarism — a longstanding problem with no solution yet — has been troubling fashion gurus and affecting their business for several years now. But how to fight it remains an unsolved puzzle.
Designer Rohit Bal is fuming, Nida Mahmood is gearing up for a legal battle, Suneet Verma has already fought it in the past, as have Tarun Tahiliani and Ritu Kumar. Design plagiarism — a longstanding problem with no solution yet — has been troubling fashion gurus and affecting their business for several years now. Recently Rohit Bal accused a fellow designer of copying his design, and designer Nida Mahmood accused a leading retail chain of stealing her design. We speak to designers about the problem, the biggest roadblocks they face in their attempt to fight it, and what they feel needs to be done to amend the design copyright laws in the country.
Sunil Sethi, FDCI president, has planned to include a senior expert in trademark and IP issues, Safir R. Anand, in his panel of experts. He says that if a case wherein both designers are affiliated to the Council pops up, this will make it easier for them to arbitrate. Otherwise, the only route for a designer would be legal recourse. “We have realised that strict action needs to be taken against plagiarism, and to help members solve copyright issues, we have invited lawyer Safir Anand as a special invitee to the board of directors. We are working on ways to assess the matter and come up with a solution. But it’s a larger issue which requires a lot of technical as well as legal understanding.”
Speaking from London, Safir explains, “Trademark is the name, image of a designer, signatures, colour marks like the red sole of Christian Louboutin, distinctive shape marks like Berkin or Kelly or perfume bottles, distinctive patterns used in trade that are consistent like EPI pattern of LV or the Burberry check. Trademark includes the look of stores, signage too. In some cases, a designer collection may be entitled to protection as a trademark too. Trademark protection in an object happens only if the object is recognised as source indicator and the look of the object is not functional. And ‘designs’ cover the design of dresses subject to filing before any commercial use. What is a point of concern for the industry is the overlap between design law and copyright. Copyright can be done over catalogues, photographs, client list and databases, drawings, sketches, web site content, etc. But copyright of an article comes to an end if the article is replicated by an industrial process more than 50 times. And design protection comes to an end if not filed before public access.” He goes on, “Designers need to protect their designs under respective IP laws but first they need to be aware of when to protect. Most cases reported in media that reflect their concerns arise due to weak protection. A strategy session should be planned soon to share the way.
At the same time, there are ways to stop all the rip-off that happens and each case has its own solutions.”
Two conflicting words — fake and creative — sit side by side in a perfectly chaotic yet creative universe of fashion. Suneet Verma, who had taken the legal route back in 2003 to fight his case of plagiarism, says, “It’s not even only about fashion, design in any form is unprotected in our country. So the problem is the legality. But we can’t stop being creative. That’s for sure. I am still fine with ‘inspired collections’ but copying something bit by bit is completely unacceptable.”
Designer Tarun Tahiliani, on the other hand, says, “Nothing can be really done, sadly. I’d say make the clothes more complex so it gets harder and harder to copy. That’s what I can think of as a solution.”
A fuming Nida, lastly says, “Our copyright law is weak and vague as of now. To give you an example, let’s just say that I make 300 designs in a week, and copyright one design, but someone who wants to cheat me can take that same design and change merely three elements and easily get away with it. That’s how weak the law is as of now. Why not protect at least 15-20 elements? I hope and pray that we change our laws quickly.”