Eons ago (10 years!) in blog world, I called out an early influencer's collaboration "collection" as being a pieced together mishmash of design elements lifted from well-known and established brands' pieces. And over the years I've tried to point out knock-offs in my "Imitation = Flattery?" series.
Sadly, this hasn't stopped even a decade on.
The latest, pretty egregious, set of products got me riled up enough to post.
I'm a big fan of Blair Eadie's style. I have no idea where she keeps it all and I'm sure the overwhelming majority is gifted to her but, I still like a lot of the same things she likes. I just wouldn't have the nerve to take a bunch of high end designer pieces from my closet and then work with a company to dumb them down and mass produce them.
If you can tell me these aren't nearly straight lifts, I'd be astonished.
Blair has said she loves a printed furry coat, especially from Shrimps, which is know for these bold styles -
Here's the coat from the A-P x Halogen collection.
Taking shoe inspiration from others really sets me off. Here's Blair wearing Prada patent, stacked-platform oxfords a while back and a close up of a pair from that same collection.
And then there's the styles from her "designs"...
I might have become the most mad about the triple-bow tops and dresses because she's making so much of them on her site. Well, here's the ASOS dress (top) the inspiration it came from. I bought this dress too. A bit miffed to see it knocked-off as if the A-P versions (bottom) are totally new.
And last, but certainly not the least example, is the Prince of Wales plaid blazer with faux fur cuffs. The collection version is cute with the pink for sure...
But I wonder how Fendi feels about being ripped off...
Pretty clear where the inspo came from, huh???
Her "collection" is filled with prints and tiered tulle skirts - very a la the pieces she wears from Red Valentino and Viktor and Rolf. I think its all very cute but I don't think intellectual property theft is a label I'd want to wear.
I know its been ages since I've posted but I had to come out of my semi-closed writing state to comment on what I think is pretty blatant shoe design theft going on over at Banana Republic.
Sure they are knocking off Stuart Weitzman's Nudist sandals like most other mid-tier brands but they are really not being subtle about these items. The top item in each pair is a current/recent Banana Republic shoe and the bottoms is the pretty obvious "inspiration" -
BR Honey vs Aquazzura Wild Things -
BR Jasmine vs Alexandre Birman Lolita
BR Jackie vs Prada 2008
To me this is the worst one - BR Cadi vs Carven's bow slingbacks
Knocking off is not cool. You can have a unique shoe at any price point. You won't have any cute shoes if we keep supporting intellectual property theft.
To say I'm utterly disgusted and disappointed would be putting it mildly.
When I saw that the SJP collection was coming to Bloomingdale's, I thought I would go by and see how the collection, which I've reviewed previously, was expanding. I figured I would see some pretty yet boring pieces along the lines of the initial styles. I was not expecting to see something shocking.
But I was absolutely floored to see that SJP had utterly ripped off possibly the most iconic shoe from all of Sex and the City - the Manolo Blahnik "Something Blue" Hangisi pump.
Here is the Angelica from the new SJP Collection at Bloomingdales (The similar 'Maddalena' style is at Nordstrom's and has a pointier toe.) -
And here is the Hangisi. The shoe which is essentially the emotional touchstone of Carrie and Big's resolution in the movie. The shoe he proposes to her with. The shoe bought for her wedding, abandoned and then worn for the simple ceremony they ultimately had. A shoe created just for this movie by Mr. Blahnik.
In some articles the leveraging of the style is more blatant. Heck in the Bloomingdale's item description, they even include a reference to "something blue". I know the Blahnik team is involved in the SJP Collection, which makes it even more disappointing. Why not use her line as an opportunity to do something new and delightful. It can't be the price point because these heels are over $500 (ironically, that is what they said the MB's were in the movie. Now they're over $900), not exactly a bargain.
So am I being too harsh? Are they different enough? Or are they leveraging a little too heavily on the SATC/Carrie magic and not creating any magic of their own?
Really LuLu's (and Party Trick). Really? These flimsily made knock-offs are out now and the originals are haven't even dropped.
Maybe it's just my eye, but I can see the difference in craftsmanship in the heel angle, the fabric placement, the metal of the studs as well as their placement and that they've just punched them through to potentially rub and cut your feet.
Having two other pairs of the the Rockstuds, the quality equals comfort and longevity.
I fully anticipate that the knock-off pair would hurt you and then fall apart?
So I'm going to do the potentially unthinkable for a shoe blogger... I'm going to diss on the upcoming SJP shoe collection from Sarah Jessica Parker and Nordstrom.
No really.
After seeing the recently released shots from Glamour, I have to admit I'm not impressed. From what I've seen the designs aren't that spectacular and the quality and workmanship does not seem to justify an average $350 (and up!) price point.
I'll be eager to see the shoes in person to see how the quality nets out but the pictures don't wow me. The red Lady pump is b-o-r-i-n-g. Even with the ribbon accent. That lackluster heel just makes me yawn.
The Carrie is pretty but reminds me of a Dior pump from a few years back. I don't know. It's just not anything special (Want to see a great t-strap? Check out these Gucci ones)
Who plopped that polyester (maybe it's silk, who's to know yet) on that boring bridesmaid heel? If the flower was in a shocking bright color and had a thinner heel, I'd be more interested in the Etta but not for $425 to be sure.
That's pretty horrible, if you ask me. Maybe I should do a special Imitation = Flattery? post just for that pair.
I've seen other sneak peek images online but from what I've seen, I'm not going to be running out to get a pair from the SJP collection. Bummer, too. Sarah Jessica Parker could have brought some of her and the SATC fashion flair to this line. But mostly they look like a boring miss-mash of knock-offs and boring bridal heels.
I thought the heel was great, the colors were perfect for Spring and the use of the bold metal strap toughened up and modernized what could have been a bit simple and girly.
Yet it still keeps the feminine look that pairs well with the dresses and skirts of the season.
I guess that why I should not be surprised that there is already a knock-off in stores, specifically the Tildon Megan pump. The lines are not nearly as good and the way the metal strap is done looks cheap.
I didn't buy the Diors, although I wish I could have, but I certainly would not consider the Tildon's. they took a beautiful, graceful design and dumbed it down to the point where it is pointless.
Kate Spade is a big fashion brand. These are not hard to find or secret items. Obviously the ModCloth supplier is aware of the designs and is totally stealing them (and making them worse in the process).
ModCloth, I really like a lot of your products, especially your dresses, but this is ridiculous!
Not so long ago the Jeffrey Campbell Michelle, aka "Unicorn", heel was exceptionally popular. This whimsical heel was sold out all over the place, but is back in stock and available in shiny black patent, shiny gold, a beautiful nude and a subtle gunmetal.
The unique piece of this shoe was the spiral hell but much of the allure came from the flirty ruffles that cupped the heel and showcased your ankle.
Steve Madden Might End Up Owning Betsey Johnson in 2012
The article states:
Being in debt feels bad and scary enough, but what do you think it feels like to — instead of owing money to a financial institution — owe money to Steve Madden? Betsey Johnson knows, now that Steve Madden Ltd. has taken over a $48.8 million loan to her company, according to papers filed with the SEC late yesterday. Johnson, whose Fashion Week show is in ten days, has until August 20, 2012 to repay Madden — otherwise he might get her brand. And her stuff.
Madden already holds a license for handbags, small leather goods, belts and umbrellas under the Betsey Johnson and Betseyville trademarks. The collateral for the loan includes the company’s intellectual property, so Madden could be in line for the labels it holds as licensee. Also included among the items securing the loan are “the borrower’s personal property, accounts, deposit accounts and cash, equipment, fixtures, general intangibles, goods [and] inventory.”
A designer brand would be just the thing to add to Madden's stable. In addition to his own Steve Madden stores, he does shoes for Madonna's Material Girl line, just bought handbag company Big Buddah for $11 million, and just invested $5 million in Bakers Footwear Group, which could lead to a one-fifth stake in the company. So while other designers, like Johnson, struggle in this economy, Madden is doing pretty well. His second-quarter results were up, with net income growing 63 percent and sales up an impressive 36 percent, while the stock is up 71.2 percent from a year ago. Somewhere American Apparel is crying into all the overpriced meatpacking-district-nightclub shoes they never made.
Sure Steve Madden is doing great! He's not investing any time or money into coming up with his own designs but just zips right into the market, stealing the good ideas of other designers. And hoards of people buy his stuff because it's a cheaper version. Who cares, right?
This is business, I understand, but I know the work that goes into a brand like Betsey's. She's been creating and kicking ass for years. It's tough times, I know but it makes me a little ill to know someone who blatently and unapologetically takes the work of other designers (and maybe commits a little stock fraud as well) could possibly get control of her brand and work.
Betsey, we're rooting for you!
Steve Madden Roster of Shame - Intellectual Property Theft Examples:
I know, I know. It's probably getting old with these knock-off/rip-off features. I guess, I just can't get over the sheer audacity of some of these companies. Imagine how draining it must be for the actual designers. They toil over inspiration and to be innovative only to have another company come along a short while later and basically copy every answer off of their test.
Case in point: The Miu Miu crystal-embellished swallow mary janes.
I was crying over these. I literally called multiple stores in the US, the UK, Paris and Italy. NOTHING! They were all sold out. I don't think they even got them here in the US, which just kills me. I mean, these were the shoes of the season for me.
In the end, I got the navy kitty mary janes, which I love and have worn a ton. But when I saw these shoes pictured in the images below, I have to admit, I was tempted for a second. I mean, they are really recreating the design and they are selling them on ebay for $55 (on Filthy Magic for $200, yikes!)
I saw them first on Flithy Magic and thought it was just a blatent rip-off. But then I found the same ones on eBay and on that page they are pairing up their product shots with actual Miu Miu runway images and ads.
I think that is crossing the line.
I know how tempting these are. I'm even struggling with it myself but at the end of the day, can I live with giving my $55 to a rip-off artist? And if I knowingly go into that transaction, what does that say about me? If I "really want them" should I just buy them? And what would I answer, everytime someone asks about them. Does any of that matter?
I'm not going to get them and I actually reported the eBay ones for infringement (mostly because of the ads used in the listing) but it's an interesting discussion worth having.
What would you do and why? How would you answer people everytime they ask you if they are "real Miu Mius" ?
I haven't done an Imitation = Flattery? post in a while, mainly because I sometimes get tired of fighting the good fight. I mean, even though many people are inspired by the designers and profess love for their style, they are perfectly happy to support people ripping them off.
Anyways, here's the latest. These are the original Chloe wedge lace-up boots. A big favorite this past season.
I've seen other knock-offs but I was disappointed that ModCloth (supporters of "indie, vintage-inspired, retro & one-of-a-kind vintage") is selling these Style Adventure Boots.
These are not "inspired by" and they aren't evolutions of the design, they are rip-offs with cheaper materials.
Yesterday I posted another in a very long series of "Imitation = Flattery?" where I expose what I feel to be shoes that have crossed over from the trend inspiration realm and go way more into the blatent ripping off of another company's designs.
I wanted to clarify why I detest this practice so much and what I feel is really so wrong about buying these shoes and supporting the companies who engage in this regularly (*cough cough Steve Madden cough cough*).
To me it comes right down to theft.
Many would argue that the practice of knocking-off is no where near as egregious as is the explosion of counterfeiting going on the shoe world today (BTW - check out Michelle's new resource site: ShoeFraud.com) but I saw that it is.
I work in an industry where we are hired to generate ideas and to create concepts, so to me intellectual property theft is a huge issue. Essentially, someone has the audacity to come in, take advantage of the hard work, creativity and innovation we have worked hard to create and just slightly tweak it to serve there ends. When this happens, customers become confused, the original message is diluted and the value we created is minimized.
This is true for large marketing campaigns, but it is true for fashion and shoes as well.
Yes, as a consumer, it is very tempting to see a designer shoe that you fall in love with and realize that it is out of your price range. It can be very tempting when you find a very similar copy to want to buy the less expensive piece to get the same look.
But if you love the original you shouldn't and I'll tell you why.
Because every time you do that, you are helping to put the original designer out of business.
The innovation and creativity is not coming from the company doing the "inspired by" piece. They are not investing time and money to create new looks, to do research and hire experienced talented individuals. How can the first company continue to do business when they outlay all the costs and then get undercut in the end?
Sadly, it is still very difficult, not to mention expensive, for companies to prosecute against the fakes although they are trying to fight back. It doesn't help that there are laws in some countries that do a poor job of protecting original designs. Our favorite Despotic Queen of Shoes, ImeldaMatt, worked on an expose into Australia's high street rip-offs (make sure to see the original post and the Camilla Skovgaard post that started it):
I have to agree with Wendy Brandes, a designer herself, who made the following comment on an earlier post:
"No one has an inalienable right to wear designer looks. There were no fast fashion runway knockoffs back in the '80s and '90s when I couldn't afford designer clothes (excluding ABS). We wore other things! Put together our own non-designer outfits! It would be nice if the H&Ms and Forever21s came up with their own looks, but then how would they churn out product at such a fast clip? The inspiration well runs dry pretty fast."
I think fashion and good design can come at all price points. I've said many times that I don't care what the pedigree or cost is for a particular shoe - if it's cute I'll get it. I also like to spend my money on unique original ideas. I want to support that no matter where it comes from. That's why I typically don't buy "plain" shoes. What I want is for these companies to spend their time thinking up ideas at price points all along the range.
But if consumers keep buying the fakes, they won't. And if we keep buying the fakes and knock-offs we are going to limit the amount of great designs put out there for us to get excited about.
