Copying company outfits

I don't understand what is so hard to understand about what I am saying. If you are planning on making an exact copy, exact detail, exact stitching and exact seems, then ofcourse that is wrong, and it should be obvious why. But if you plan on being inspired by the dress then you are fine. So if your intent is to make an exact copy then yes that is wrong. And it shouldn't matter what the use is. It is wrong no matter if it is for personal use or commercial use. The bar should be set the same level for anyone.

If you wanted a Van Gogh painting but since cant afford it, would it be okay to commission an artist to paint a piece completely identical to an original Van Gogh? So it the same answer now as before if you hired single seamstress.


And in response about movies not being made under my reasoning of making exact copies of clothing being wrong. That makes no sense! I'm movies the costume designer uses influences of the time period they are making clothes for. They are not copying someone else's design completely. Name a movie where a costume design was copied from another design.

People are missing the point that being inspired by a design or look is perfectly fine. It is copying it exactly down to the littlest detail that is wrong.

This is what I have been trying to express. There is a difference between being inspired by a design and copying it outright.

 

Debates are arguments concerning differing points of view, not to be directed to the individuals that make them. I don’t want my comments to feel like an attack, especially when there are clearly impassioned members voicing their heartfelt opinions.
IMHO Fashion design is not original (because of the strong historical or cultural influences) and therefore should not be given intellectual rights. As a universal necessity clothing is being altered and redesigned continuously around the world. So there are simply too many people with similar ideas on fashion to say one should get the creative rights. At what point do you draw the line? Is it with individual parts, colors or fabrics?
To think on an extreme end of the spectrum…what would happen if every designer patented their work so no one could use their dyes, sleeves, waist styles, fabric and ribbons? Everyone would be in very dreary bags unless they could afford to purchase something directly from the designer.

 

Actually... the original questions in full was: "What are your thoughts or views on copying a sold out outfit for your own use?" and "are limited outfits ever okay to be copied?"

Thoughts and views on copying designs have been made clear however, no one has specifically addressed the "sold out" part of the question.

Thoughts and views have also been expressed on the ethical side of copying limited outfits but again, there have not been many clear points of views on their limited nature.


As an example, a specific outfit is made to an extremely limited quantity: 50 pieces. This is then sold for say, £100 profit each (actual figure is probably higher for shipping, time spent designing etc.) making a net profit of £5000. That's it - the designer is only EVER going to see £5000. What a consumer then does with the outfit or whatever happens to the outfit does not and will never go back to the designer. So someone who has bought 10 pieces makes an extremely tidy profit by being the middleman to other consumers - but the designers never sees any of this money.


The question is: does copying make any difference at this point..?

At a designer's point of view: this is horrible, your limited design is only enjoyed by at the most, 50 individuals and there are others profiting from your hard earned work either by copying or by middleman reselling.

As a consumer's point of view: this is horrible, you can't get what you want unless you pay through the nose for it or break ethical rights that don't actually mean squat in a business world. Alternatively, you can make your own version of the outfit as best as you can or as similarly as you can. You can even pay someone else to do it for you since the original designer is not going to do it for you, under any circumstance.

How do we behave to this as a consumer?


The outfit is sold out/unavailable and whatever method you use in an attempt to purchase a genuine copy, the original designer is NEVER going to see a penny of it due to this unique situation.
Morally, it's wrong to copy someone's hard work and we have some laws as an attempt to prevent that from happening.

The video game industry is pretty much this situation - there are used game stores making money specifically from this unique situation of games that are no longer available! Rare games must be copied in order to be played by those who cannot afford a discontinued system and a £100+ game (Panzer Dragoon Saga, anyone?). I can assure you that the original designers did not want their game to be copied but in order for a gamer to play it now, they have no way to pay any respect to the original game designers.


(Being in the fashion industry does indeed suck - but wait until you get into the music/film industry. Sampling and public use is extremely difficult to maintain - technically, everytime you lend your copy of an officially bought album/single/film to a friend or family member, you are breaking the law. (Did you also know that the song "Happy Birthday to you!" is copyrighted and you should pay the original creator of it at least £50 everytime you use it..? Yeah....)



(Also um... very off-topic but...

"Name a movie where a costume design was copied from another design."

Almost every parody movie ever...
Spaceballs, Fanboys, Team America World Police, Orgasmo, Baseketball, Austin Powers etc.
Then there's historicals/dramas... Troy, Alexander, 300 and virtually every chinese martial arts film to do with the Qing Dynasty...

Technicality, I know... but you did state to name... and I had to rise to the challenge)


(Why does everyone write in a block of text in a discussion/debate..?)

 

@Crou: Isn't that a bit...uh, extreme?
A design is like a puzzle, you have the parts, the materials, the colors, the buttons etc. and then you put it together to something new and (hopefully, but not always) unique.
Sure there are designers out there who just make a shirt, put their name on it and that's it.
Still there are enough original designs out there, and saying that being influenced by the past and its styles makes the works of current designer not original is very drastic and also unfair.
That's like saying every company that came after Volks is not original because the first ones popping up after them were definitely inspired by their work and thus should not get any intellectual rights for their work. Same for every other idea that got copied (like dolls with fantasy parts etc.).

However, not the idea is usually important but the execution, how it looks like in the end. The basic idea might have been the same for everyone, but in the end it's only important how the product looks like.
That's why usually people say being influenced or accidentaly having the same idea is totally fine...you can't invent the wheel new all the time.
However, looking at a dress and trying to copy it as good as possible is an absolute no-go.
It's okay to a certain part to copy an idea, it's not okay to copy a certain design.
(I'm mostly talking about moral here, not about legal issues)


And it also doesn't matter in this case if something is sold out or limited or whatever. The design, the rights are in the hands of the designer/maker, no matter if he decides to sell his product or not. It hurt their feelings to steal their designs, just like recasting hurts sculpting artists and stealing artworks hurts the people who draw them.

 

Did any of you realize that many pattern companies state that their patterns are not to be used for commercial clothing? In other words, those people who, say, make costumes to sell & make them from commercially bought patterns often are in a very grey legal area.
Just saying.
Some of us can make our own patterns. I'm so sorry but if I see something I like (be it cosplay or a designer dress) I can make a pattern for it & make one for myself. I usually DON'T use the same color scheme/material but I do if it's a cosplay.
There was just a huge to-do in the Firefly/Browncoat universe over Jayne hats (which is a generic Peruvian knit hat w/ear flaps in a specific color scheme, from an episode never aired, made popular by fans). Fox, in a renewed effort to prove themselves the Alliance, all of a sudden decided they owned that design (they don't) but no one can call them Jayne hats anymore because that is using the 'trademark'.
So this is an instance of a commercial company taking something totally generic & trying to own it.
The Volks cosplay outfits are most likely excellent quality. The commercially available human-size cosplay outfits, which are licensed & therefore making money for the anime/manga artists (more likely the production companies), are very often really shoddy quality & I would NOT be caught DEAD in them. Thank goodness it is NOT illegal to do my own.

 

Okay, I just have to say, I don't think people understand how clothes are designed and made. If fashion designer was able to copyright their designs it would be for their completed piece, details and all, not an idea or type of sleeve or what ever. It's like how musicians can copyright full songs but not things like types of music, scales, or song structures like verse, chorus, verse.

People would still be able to make things like tshirts no problem. Look at all the companies that make tshirts. You have fruit of the loom, Haines, anvil, jerzee, American apparel, etc. that is just a few of them and they are all completely different in terms of fit, look, feel. Like I said, designers would not be copyrighting an idea, but a specific design, detail, stitching type and all. So no other person could make that exact same shirt with the exact same details.

And as for what someone said above about parody movies copying exact outfits. Parody law is so different. It can not be compared to this because with parodies it is completely legal to use music someone else wrote, look at weird al with his music. Also in those movies, like team America, what outfits did they copy completely to the very last detail? Same for biopics like movies about the Ming dynasty. The costumes are inspired and created to look like the clothing from that time, not copying to a t what was done. Also for movies set in the past that feature designer clothing like Versace, did you know they allow costume designers to recreate their outfits, for a price and also for marketing/publicity because they get their name mentioned in a movie

 

That is actually not enforceable. This is an often-contentious issue on the knitting site I frequent (Ravelry), and the answer (at least if you're under US jurisdiction) is that the designer has no right to say what you can and cannot do with your finished objects.

Here, have some supporting sources.

http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/CopyrightLaw/Patterns.shtml

http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat072706.html

 

That still doesn't address how a consumer can get an out of stock/never to be reproduced item.
Fashion pretty much depends on what's in and what's not at the moment. It's actually completely irrelevant how they're made - what's relevant is how a consumer to obtain the product.

It's clear that many indivuduals feel extremely strongly about their work being copied (either mostly or fully but not partly..? Slightly illogical but it's okay, we're human, everyone has their foibles). This still doesn't address the fact that there is a market for out-of-stock items that a designer is refusing to reproduce.


As for the parody/movie thing, like I said if you read my post, it's off topic and a technicality therefore it's also irrelevant.
However, just to entertain this, why is parody law okay to copy but others are? Weird Al still needs to deal with the PRS for samples and The Bloodhound Gang/Beastie Boys needs to pay for all of their samples and royalties.
Fun fact: the amen break drum loop is copied in a lot and because it was never copyrighted, people still continue to use it to this day and pass it off as their own. AND IT'S LEGAL! But morally wrong - but that's the nature of the business, music or fashion.

 

People can get that out of stock item by paying for it whether in a store or in an auction or whatever. The point is duplicating that exact item down to every detail because you can't find it or can't afford it is wrong! The item you are buying is still the actual item that was made by the designer.

It is okay because you aren't copying word for word or note for note someone's work. You are changing it, but you are right, it is completely off topic. And as for the last line, that is what I have been saying all along (look at my very first post) about making an exact copy of a dress, it may be legal, but it is morally wrong, and that is why you shouldn't do it! Just because something is legal does not make it right or justified.

 

Not everyone has the same moral code as you.

 

CrippledCuriosity you are saying that even personal use coppys you are never going to sell are moraly wrong? What about bjd desiners that copy human fasions and scale them down for dolls. By your critera they are morraly wrond as some who likes an sd sized outfit and makes a copy for their tiny. And what about things like uniforms and school outfits. Because volks made one does that mean dollmore or luts would be coppying them if they made their own?

 

No what I am saying and what I have always been saying is it is wrong if you are copying an outfit outright with all the detail and everything. There are many different types of school uniforms, now if the outfits dollmore made were identical in every way then yes that is wrong, but copying an idea is not wrong. Just like in music you can copyright a song, but you can't copyright the idea of a song like "I'm going to write a song that goes verse, chorus, verse". It is the same thing.

Is it wrong to make a recast if it is just for yourself? Is it wrong to forge a painting if it is just for yourself? Yes. Copying something exactly of any kind is wrong. Using something as inspiration to make your own thing with your own spin is perfectly fine.

This topic is about copying an outfit for a doll that isn't for sale anymore. Getting into turning human clothes into doll clothes is getting way off topic because that is not what this topic is about.

 

But if coppying doll clothes is wrong because it steals from the desiner's rights than coppying human clothes must be as well because they are the same thing.

 

Exactly. I love Alexander McQueen, but can't afford his clothing, and most is unavailable. I'm not going to copy one of his designs just because I don't have the means to own one of his items of clothing.

And if you mean, human clothes to doll clothes, 1) that's not what this topic is asking and 2) can you buy it in doll size? Was is ever available? No because it is human, therefore it is okay because you are using it as inspiration for doll clothing. The details won't be exactly the same, and the intent is completely different when you make things on a different scale.

 

It'll cost an arm and a leg to do that for some items...

Can there absolutely be no other alternatives in your eyes? Is there no way a copy can be accepted in any way at all..? (Such as an Art Print you make yourself with your own printer and canvas)

Perfect - now we're getting somewhere on topic and can perhaps continue discussing!!

Even though the designer is not getting ANYTHING at all for it if the item was bought from "an auction site or whatever?"
This is morally okay in your eyes..? As long as your product's integrity and limited quantity is intact, it doesn't matter what happens to it afterwards?


While everyone has different morals and different views on the matter, it's really interesting to note how varied the responses are. It's irrelevant whether or not something is morally correct - what's relevant are the repercussions. In this case the designer loses out on money - but not if the item was bought in an auction house.
I can understand if this moral standpoint was consistent but it's really not. Some individuals pirate music, movies, fashion, games, art and so on simply because they can't afford to compete with everyone else. Are these individuals not permitted to even enjoy a replica?

Princess Diana's Wedding dress is essentially one-of-a-kind but I can guarantee you more than one individual has asked, commissioned and worn an exact duplicate of the dress. Anyone seeing the dress will know its origin and the designer will benefit no matter what in terms of free advertising. However, everything done by it, by your standards, is morally wrong. So that entire wedding with the replica wedding dress is a shambles due to that replica and it not being correct.

Yet... you are saying if there was one alteration to it - for instance the size, cut or a seam, then it is more acceptable?


Again, the point is to discuss, not to stamp out whether or not things are right or wrong.
No one is making personal attacks - we're here to learn. We're here to discuss and we're here to know what others can tolerate.
For instance, is there absolutely no way you can condone copying at all..?


If you were broke, in debt, have children to feed with no immediate family and you found a wallet with £5000 cash in it, with no ID card inside, you're telling me you would turn it into the police? Because that would be morally correct - but not the right thing to do.

 

I'm not really too hot for presenting arguments on forums or dictating morals for other folks... that's all up to you, OP. The only advice I would give on that front is that if you don't feel right in your heart about something then, by all means, don't do it. It's a good rule of thumb.

As far as the logistics of copying an outfit/art/etc: copy the heckfire out of whatever you want. As an artist I see many ideas I love and want to copy. I started copying other art when I was a child because I was learning how to draw, design, etc. As I grew as an artist, the joy I took was not in copying the idea exactly- it was about twisting into something familiar into my own unique style and through that process I learned how to express my own ideas. in the end I had an awesome piece of art totally unrelated to the original muse.

Additionally, I've never seen anyone complete an outfit to the exact same level/quality as some manufacturers. I've totally seen people do their own thing even better than major companies (similar styling and all) but I haven't seen a direct copy where I was like "OMG, THAT IS THE SAME DRESS. DRESS THEFT!"

Unless you are out to mass produce something else's idea specifically to make profit off of their vision, I'd say do your thing and don't stress.

Enjoy your hobby and see where it takes you.

 

A copy is fine with artist/designers approval. I have seen artists that put designs up and tell people to feel free to do what they want with them including printing. But we are getting off topic, because a print of a painting is not the same as a identically made dress.

Yes because that is the art world. That is how any type of art is sold. Paintings, jewelry, sculptures. You want a Picasso painting? You go to an auction to get one. You don't go to a painter and have him duplicate one identically.

No I don't think pirating music or movies is right. And firstly a replica is completely different than making a copy or a knock-off. Replicas are things approved by designers and artists. And dresses are one offs for a reason. People probably commissions a dress that looked like princess Diana's dress, but I doubt it was an exact match. I have seen dresses inspired by that dress, but when you look you can clearly see differences. And if a bride was wearing an actual replica dress that means the designer approved someone making the replica and that's when you get into licensing. I just know most actual clothing designers who take commissions will not copy a dress 100%. They will use that dress in as inspiration.

And when I say changes to a dress I don't mean alterations like sizing or cutting. When I talk about seams being different, I'm talking about a French seam vs doing a standard seam. I'm talking about it being draped in a different way, or pleating done differently.

And yes I would turn a wallet with money into the police. But I'm not sure what this has to do with anything, because it isn't just the moral thing to do, it is the correct thing to do because taking that money is stealing. It isn't yours, it never belonged to you and can be arrested for keeping it.

 

Alright, I'm satisfied with your answers and I now know how strong your moral compass is on this matter.

I don't agree with you but I'm not declaring war on you or anything like that.
Your opinions matter on this and while my moral compass isn't as finely tuned as yours, I would steal to satisfy a bodily need or to save on expenses.

Unfortunately, in our world, it is very easy to be influenced to the point where you become morally bankrupt - almost everything anyone does, can be argued into a different way. (Such as burglars getting to sue their victim for having a damaged roof that they fell through and hurt themselves).

In my opinion, so long as there is a business, there will be illogical morals and there will be exceptions made on occassion.

 

And maybe that is why I became so burnt out with the fashion industry. It is still a passion, but got hard that many people don't see it as an art form. So now with my degree and experience in fashion I am a body piercer haha.