Around a month before new US Congress starts, this blogger is
wondering whether all the fuss over the Innovative
Design Protection Act (IDPA) back in September was a
bit of a storm in a teacup. Will the IDPA be approved this year? Although it
has been approved by a Senate Committee it still needs approval of the full
Senate and House of Representatives. Govtrackus' prognosis
is: "Just 21% of all Senate bills reported favorably by committee in
2009–2010 were enacted." With a lame duck session before new Congress
starts that approval is looking less and less likely.
The IDPA is "a bill to amend title 17, United States Code, to
extend protection to fashion design, and for other purposes." The question
under debate is: does fashion need and/or deserve protection?
A question which could be debated forever. On the one hand why
should fashion designers be treated any differently to creators of other
original artistic works? On the other, it is clear that the fashion industry
benefits from knock-offs. The faster the churn of designs from luxury to high
street, the faster designers need to produce new looks to fill the vacuum at
the top.
Designers currently rely on a mix of trade mark and design rights
to assert their rights: just this month a shoe designer, Charles Philip, filed
a claim in the Central District of California in Los Angeles against The
Gap. Philip argued that The Gap essentially copied his Fall/Winter 2012 loafer
collection and stole his striped shoe lining, which he claims is his signature
style. Unable to sue for copyright infringement, he claimed trademark
infringement, trade dress infringement, unfair competition, dilution, right of
publicity, and other claims. Should Philip have copyright over his shoes? Or
does he not need copyright given the other raft of rights on which he can rely?
|
For more on copyright in fabrics see here |
As I have commented on this blog before,
if English judges apply recent CJEU cases harmonising the concept of a work so
that all works that are their "author's own intellectual creation"
are protected, fashion designers will find it much easier to protect their
works using copyright in the UK. Works that do not currently easily fall into
one of the 8 works protected by the CDPA, such as shoes, perfume, make up,
garments, hats etc, could be protected by copyright.
I would be interested in hearing readers' opinions: is the
life-cycle of a design too short for the fashion industry to care? Or does that
logic only apply to garments? Should the UK fashion industry be lobbying for
application of the CJEU decisions in order to expand copyright protection? And
how might this affect other industries?
No comments:
Post a Comment