The Ownership of Creativity...

softgrey

flaunt the imperfection
Joined
Jan 28, 2004
Messages
52,891
Reaction score
312
FORD’S FRIENDS: Tom Ford is making more connections in Hollywood.
Ford will join legendary television director-producer Norman Lear as a speaker Saturday at the first annual “Ready to Share: Fashion and the Ownership of Creativity” conference, a daylong event at the University of Southern California. Inspiration, creativity, piracy, counterfeiting and other issues involving the creative process in fashion, as well as film and music, will be explored.
The by-invitation-only guests will include people working in fashion, film, music, academia and law. .
“We had been looking at the question of creativity and ownership of ideas for several years now,” said Martin Kaplan, director of the Norman Lear Center and associate dean of the USC Annenberg School for Communications, where the event will be held. “In movies and music, there is a raging debate in this country about sampling, remixing, piracy, inspiration, derivation and rip-offs. We wanted to expand that discussion to include a realm where the traditions, practices and laws were really quite different. I thought fashion would be a way to do that.”
“[The fashion industry] exists without many of the high walls that people in music and film believe are necessary in order to protect creators,” Kaplan said. “It’s something of a mystery, and we wanted to figure out how that could be.”

excerpt from wwd.... :flower:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think that would be a fascinating discussion...
WHO OWNS AN IDEA???...why can a song be copyrighted but not a dress...?
there are laws about plagiarising words...but not about plagiarising a silhouette...

and how much would i love to hear what mr ford has to say on the subject ...seeing as so many of his own 'ideas'...were blatantly borrowed or inspired by great designers of the past...
 
I remember a while ago writing a post about all the hideous fake bags I saw on a trip to the mall.....I'm talking really hideous. Not a $100-150 fake Louis Vuitton, I'm talking $10-30. Not even trying to look real. I like your point about songs being copyright, but not peoples art!
 
I think that "imitation" bags/shoes/clothing etc. should be illegal. To me it is like one painter copying another (more famous and talented) painter's work and selling it himself. Or a musician copying someone else's song as someone pointed out above. But it's so hard to draw the line between an inspired piece and a flat out fake. I just feel bad for the designers who make amazing, unique clothing and then end up seeing cheap knockoffs of their creations.
 
I was thinking about this the other day, and thinking of Paul Poiret, especially and how he launched the "pegtop" or hobbleskirt and the high-waisted, draped tunic tops. He was really the first to initiate that style, but as other designers adopted a similar line (though made less radical, which made it more accceptable to the public at large) it caught on, but was sometimes known as the Poiret look, even if it came from Lucille or Callot.

From time to time, a designer creates a watershed moment in fashion. Dior and the new look, Yves St. Laurent and the shift dress, Thierry Muglier and the shoulderpads...at first it is very shocking and distinctive, and immediately recognisable as the work of a specific designer, then everyone else falls in line with the Big Look, and its origins become blurrier. The woman in Wyoming in 1950 who ordered her small-waisted, wide-skirted dress from the Sears catalogue was probably not thinking about Christian Dior, she was thinking that this new, girly style was pretty, and a nice change of pace from the over-tailored, yet skimpy styles of the war years.

If desigers are allowed to clamp down on ownership of ideas, how are new ideas and styles ever going to be disseminated? How are they to get to the average woman on the street? I expect some designers don't think the average woman should wear their styles. We already know what Karl Lagerfeld's ideas on that are. Snotty old geezer!
 
that's very true and very well said ayli...

but allow me to take the other side for a moment...

perhaps if designers were forced to come up with their own ideas ...rather than just expanding on those of others...we'd all have more options to choose from...

just a thought... :innocent:
 
I'd be SO curious to hear TOM FORD speak on the ownership of ideas! :lol: :woot: That's like hearing Dean & Dan Caten speak out against tasteless clothing.

I just think we're at a saturation point where nothing can really be claimed as new anymore. It's a cliche, but most everything has 'been done before'. I think, increasingly, the contemporary designer's role is more about reformulating and styling than anything else. Sure, there are some (Rei, Yohji, etc.) that seem to follow the beat of their own drum. But you have to wonder, are they really turning out new ideas or just being more abstract and clever in their mining of 'inspiration'?
 
metal-on-metal said:
I'd be SO curious to hear TOM FORD speak on the ownership of ideas! :lol: :woot: That's like hearing Dean & Dan Caten speak out against tasteless clothing.

I just think we're at a saturation point where nothing can really be claimed as new anymore. It's a cliche, but most everything has 'been done before'. I think, increasingly, the contemporary designer's role is more about reformulating and styling than anything else. Sure, there are some (Rei, Yohji, etc.) that seem to follow the beat of their own drum. But you have to wonder, are they really turning out new ideas or just being more abstract and clever in their mining of 'inspiration'?

I KNOW>>> :lol: ...i hope wwd reports back after the conference...i'd like to know what was said... :P

so...if we take music...there are a finite number of notes...but if you put them together a certain way...then that combination of notes becomes yours...and if someone else wants to sample your work...you get paid a royalty fee...why couldn't this be true in fashion?...would that work?... :unsure:
 
Woa! Interesting thread, especially for someone who is taking a Sociology course called "Information wants to be free." I wonder if any published material will come out of this conference.

Here are some things to ponder:

1) Availability of ideas in the public domain (those you don't have to pay for), and the enrichment of culture as a result.
2) The authorship problem, as in what exactly you created? With a song, did you create language and notes, or just a variation (a mix) thereof?
3) Copyright protection. How long? Does the overly lengthy copyright term actually protect creativity (which it originally supposed to do), or does it actually stifles creativity (For example, if I'm getting royalties all my life for my book, what's the insentive to right another one?)
4) The myth of the lonely artist who creates things out of thin air. All creators draw on some other available ideas for inspiration, or are shaped by other ideas.
 
alright faust...i will ponder and get back to you... ^_^ :innocent:
 
This is a very interesting idea, and one that will likely be debated for a long time.

I do believe that when a designer/company releases an exact copy of another designer's creation -- that is ethically wrong,and should be legally protected, just as a textile design is legally protected. An example is the Burberry pattern. The company has advertised that it will go after any producer of counterfeit burberry products. Maybe that is an important factor -- the idea that a knock-off is a counterfeit -- vs being a copy, or "designer-inspired".

I believe action was taken agains Ralph Lauren a number of years ago for duplication created under his name...I'll have to look that up.

But this all reminds me of a housing contractor who got into some trouble, after he used duplicate plans to build a house, which he sold to a family. Certainly the builder or architect who designed the original plans did not invent the idea of putting a house together using walls, a ceiling, flooring, a basement, deck and 4 bedrooms, etc...the WAY he/she combined those elements formed that exclusive design. That design was protected legally and could not be copied legally. Along came the second builder who liked the design and copied, and sold it for his own personal profit.

I look at apparel design in a similar way...unless someone can point out something that will give me a new perspective. Obviously the idea of pants, skirt, dress have already been invented. Furthermore, the shape of the dress, whether shift, peg, asymmetrical, whatever...has also been invented already. But the combination of silhouette, fabrication, scale, texture, color, details -- that specific combination is unique and should be legally protected. I mean there no way that as a designer I'll come up with something completely new to the universe. But I believe its my obligation to put my own interpretation to a concept. And by the way, for the builder who copied the house I described above, the law did not concider it enough that he simply gave the house a different color than the original house.

Its just something to think on.
 
marrimoda said:
I look at apparel design in a similar way...unless someone can point out something that will give me a new perspective. Obviously the idea of pants, skirt, dress have already been invented. Furthermore, the shape of the dress, whether shift, peg, asymmetrical, whatever...has also been invented already. But the combination of silhouette, fabrication, scale, texture, color, details -- that specific combination is unique and should be legally protected. I mean there no way that as a designer I'll come up with something completely new to the universe. But I believe its my obligation to put my own interpretation to a concept.

I agree with you, and it's definitely an interesting topic...

I do remember Nicolas Ghesquiere getting in trouble a few years back for his patchwork collection that "generously sampled" from a designer's collection from the 70s...and more recently Marc Jacobs was sued for something he did (which is also interesting because most of what Marc does is sampled...)

But now that I think about it, what most designers do is "inspired" by another time (and by extension, what another designer was probably doing at that time)...what Michael Kors is doing, for example...kinny leopard print pants and oversized white sunglasses, Palm Beach/Greek Isles...it's nothing new...
 
some very very good points and examples marrimoda...

and i have to say i agree...the designer SHOULD add something NEW to make it their own...

this came up years ago (early 90's) when YSL tried to sue ralph lauren for a tuxedo dress that lauren designed which was remarkable similar to one that YSL had done years before...if i remember correctly it was a full-length dress that was backwards...in other words...it looked like having a tuxedo on backwards with a deep v and buttons in the back...

i'm not sure what the final outcome of that case was...does anyone know?...
 
In 1994 YSL sued Ralph Lauren over a tuxedo dress that seemed too similar to a 1970 YSL design and won substantial damages.


look what i found... :innocent:
 
i also found this...looks like someone did their homework... :shock:

http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/st_org/iptf/articles/content/1997121201.html

18 May 1994, (Paris) (Ralph Lauren was found to have exactly copied a YSL dress). (NB: Mr. Lauren is "known" to be heavily "inspired" by the works of his fellow designers. This was not the first time he was sued for infringment in Europe).
:ninja:

apparently the laws are stricter in europe than in the US...
which goes back to the conversation about culture and fashion... :wink:

and i guess the moral of the story is...
if you're gonna rip someone off...better make sure that they're dead so they can't sue you... :innocent:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I found this article from the Guardian...talks about the Balenciaga issue:

[font=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Darling, you look so 1973...[/font][font=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]

Nicolas Ghesquière is considered to be one of today's most original fashion designers. So when he confessed to directly copying a design from the 70s, the fashion world was shocked. But is he alone? Charlie Porter on how designers borrow heavily from the past

[/font]Charlie Porter
[font=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif]Wednesday April 10, 2002
[/font]
Nicolas Ghesquière's spring/summer collection for Balenciaga in Paris last October had everyone thinking that they were seeing some of the most original creations of the season. The 32-year-old French designer, who has turned the venerable house of Balenciaga into one of the hippest labels in fashion, sent out a series of elaborately patchworked outfits made from shapes that looked like kidney beans melted by Salvador Dali. Although virtually unwearable, the delicately-constructed pieces helped to fuel fashion's current obsession with all things hand-made.
But there is a problem - it seems that Ghesquière did not come up with the starkly modern design at all. The patchwork outfits were a direct copy of a top made in 1973 by Kaisik Wong, an obscure San Francisco-based designer who died in 1996. And Ghesquière admits the crime.

Catwalk copying is nothing new, especially on the high street. Right now at Karen Millen you can find gold trousers remarkably similar to those at Prada, while Marks & Spencer are very proud of its animal-print kaftans which echo the ones shown at Yves Saint Laurent. These cheaper copies are usually seen as the sincerest form of flattery, proving that the brand being mimicked is highly desired by the public. But when Ghesquière confirmed the gossip about his designs - started two weeks ago on the fashion gossip website Chic Happens - it was seen as bursting the bubble about designers and how they define the word "inspiration". The clothes sold by labels such as Balenciaga are so good, you want them to be completely original. Often, it seems, they are not.

"I'm very flattered that people are looking at my sources of inspiration," Ghesquière told the New York Times when asked about the copying. Revealing that he saw his design technique as similar to that of sampling in the music industry, he stated: "This is how I work. I've always said I'm looking at vintage clothes." The designer admitted that an assistant had found a picture of the top in a fashion book called Native Funk & Flash, and assumed that the outfit was merely a piece of theatrical costume. Wong, who was a friend of the writer Tom Wolfe, is said to have worked free-form with a pair of scissors in each hand, taking inspiration as it came to him.

Ghesquière, on the other hand, is a designer rightly celebrated for his uncompromisingly chic clothing that has an unexpected commercial clout. Until his appointment as chief designer in 1997, Balenciaga had become an irrelevant fashion label, failing to recapture the glory that its founder, Cristobal Balenciaga, had enjoyed in the 50s. Ghesquière brought an edgy cool to the house, making its tight trousers and battered-looking handbags bestsellers, and last summer, Gucci Group bought the little-known label to raise its profile. Anna Wintour threw an exclusive dinner party for Ghesquière, with Sarah Jessica Parker as the guest of honour; Kate Moss caused a stir when she wore a highly conceptual Balenciaga dress to the party for Mario Testino's exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery; and Jennifer Connelly was in Balenciaga when she accepted her Academy Award for best supporting actress last month. Ghesquière is building the sort of reputation that doesn't need accusations of plagiarism.

"Given that there is so little innovation around, and Ghesquière has one of the few distinctive sensibilities, it is depressing that he has been quite so derivative," says Alice Rawsthorn, director of the Design Museum in London. "But it's not as though anyone could be labouring under any illusions that other designers don't do it." Rawsthorn points to Marc Jacobs and Miuccia Prada as designers who have admitted to taking strong inspiration from archives and vintage stores. "Fashion is trapped at the moment in retro recycling," she continues. "I'm in my 40s and I'm being sold recycled designs from the first time around. Obviously the 60s and 70s were about moving forward and innovation, and it's absolutely impossible for designers to keep that momentum up."

Designers have always looked to the past for inspiration; most famously, Christian Dior based his landmark New Look collection on memories of his mother, but in those days the past was not so minutely archived by the media and he could pass the belle époque off as his own. After the technical and social advances of the mid-20th century spurred designers to create looks that seemed wholly new, the current clutch of fashion labels find it hard to take inspiration from anywhere but the past. Designers and their stylists scour flea markets and charity shops in the hope of finding clothes that they can turn into their own. Once the pattern has been copied, nipped and tucked to the label's particular style, and the garment remade in modern fabrics, the designer has a piece with the vintage feel that is still highly sought after by big-spending fashion consumers.

Usually, the second-hand outfits that provide such strong inspiration are unknown and virtually impossible to trace. But, like Ghesquière, occasionally designers are found out. In 1994, Yves Saint Laurent successfully sued Ralph Lauren over a tuxedo dress originally designed by the former in 1970. Lauren was found guilty of unfair competition and counterfeiting. But although Ghesquière has admitted to it, no action will be taken over the Balenciaga copy, and fashion insiders believe that Ghesquière's design indiscretion will not actually do his label any harm.

"Ghesquière has credibility as a designer above and beyond one close vintage clone," says Rawsthorn. Although the patchwork pieces were the most eye-catching garments in the collection, it is the baggy combats worn with them that have caused the biggest frenzy in stores. Indeed, even if you wanted a copy of Wong's design, it is virtually impossible to buy one of the patchwork tops, since the £5,000 pieces were made mainly for the catwalk show, and not for mass production. Go to the Balenciaga section in Harvey Nichols and you'll see racks of beautifully tailored trousers, not patchwork and tassels. The skinny, rich women who are able to both fit into and afford his clothes know that Ghesquière's cutting skills are unique, even if his ideas have proven to be otherwise.


 
I remember reading an article by Guy Trebay for NYT, called "Imitation is the Mother of All Creation" about how designers send their assistance to dig in the old magazines for ideas. I wish I could post it, but NYT website is demanding money for it. Boo!!!

Ok, so how unique does something have to be in order to be protected by the copyright? You can't copyright a basic three button jacket, right?
 
i'm sorry...but i think that s*cks...!!!...
it would be different if ghesquiere put it in the show notes and gave credit to the original designer and did it as an homage to a great talent that was never fully appreciated...but to put it out there as his own original work is really wrong and immoral in my book...

he only admitted it when he was caught...what a fraud...!!!
BOO!!!....BOO!!!....:angry:

thanks for the article kimair...it's great!!... :flower:
 
faust said:
Ok, so how unique does something have to be in order to be protected by the copyright? You can't copyright a basic three button jacket, right?

did you check out that link i posted...it goes into great detail...maybe there's something about it in there?...

:unsure:
 
i was in a great little vintage store in lohdon on mercer st in covent garden...
i got to talking with the owner...and he was telling me about how he's had a realtionship for years with many fashion houses...esp prada...they are always looking for things...so when he gets his hands on something he thinks will interest them he calls them up...usually they say just send over the whole box...

most especially they like sunglasses and he recently found some crazy, never worn vintage japanese sneakers...they took the whole carton...methinks they will become the next prada sport footwear collection...:innocent:

the owner has a great eye and for anyone who is or is going to be in london (hanne...are you listening???...)...i highly recommend stopping by...it's a tiny place stuffed with merchandise...but he's got some good stuff in there...even some vintage YSL...i got two bags which i love...

why buy a designer copy when you can get the original for a fraction of the price... :P B)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->