The Fashion Industry, with its glamorous colours and creative looks, is, without any doubt, an art form. But legally speaking was it given the said recognition from the beginning? No. This can be understood from the ‘historical debate’ section in this note. Later on, the importance and the need of the fashion to be considered as an art form, as it should be from the beginning. The reason for the same is dealt with in the ‘why fashion should be considered as art?’ section. But, there’s also a hindrance with this aspect. Such Hindrance is also dealt with in this note in the section named ‘the desire-hindrance.’ To connect all this with India, at the end of the note, the relevant concepts of Art Law in India that are related with the Fashion are listed out. 

Are the designers artists or artisans? The historical debate: 

Fashion, now seen as a glamorous industry that dictates the trends and the social currents of our time, did not always have this positive connotation. Scholars have pointed out that historically, “garment designers were looked down upon as servants,” and only since the 1850s, has the status of fashion designers been steadily improving. Despite fashion’s current status as a profitable, competitive, and tremendously creative industry, debates still exist over whether fashion is a form of art. 

This is evident as fashion designers are denied the same IP protections granted to other artistic mediums, including music, film, painting, sculpture, and industrial designs industries. Fashion is traditionally “characterized as a low intellectual property protection regime,” meaning the fashion industry does not receive the full scope of IP protections. 

Ultimately, this line of reasoning suggests that differences exist between the work of artisans and that of artists. This divide centers around the belief that artisans make objects designed for use and convenience, whereas, artists create non-instrumental work. Because fashion designers are artisans and not artists, a lower level of IP protection exists within the fashion industry. 

The division between artisans and artists is “ceaselessly renegotiated,” implying that the perception of this industry is continuously changing; however, IP laws have not followed suit. In recent years, “public perception of fashion design as a form of art is evident in the culture surrounding fashion events.” Museums have begun to include fashion exhibits, showcasing designs as works of art. 

As fashion makes its way into artistic acceptance, it still maintains its own unique identity. Fashion is unlike other artistic fields, as it can express the novel tastes of both the creator and the purchaser. Thus, fashion is a multifaceted art. Even though society has begun to accept fashion as a form of art, fashion’s original perception as a field for artisans inhibits fashion from receiving the full scope of IP protections.

There is “a very fine line between what copy is and what inspiration is” and the fashion industry has constantly tackled the question of whether increased IP protection should be applied. Advocates for increased protection within the fashion industry believe that an “author of a design for a dress should be deemed to be on the same footing as the author of a drawing or a picture” and like their artistic counterparts’ their work should be afforded protection. Since the early 1900s, individuals have constantly attempted to limit piracy in the field of fashion design.

Why should Fashion be considered as an Art form?

“In fashion, one day you’re in and the next you’re out.” This renowned expression reflects the constant state of flux that is apparent in the fashion industry. Designers continuously strive to produce new lines and products to represent society’s desires. These designers rack their minds each season hoping to create the new “it” products, which are ultimately prone to being copied. Numerous knockoffs inevitably emerge on the market, making designs available at low prices and allowing the knockoffs to amass high volume sales. The knockoff industry targets consumers who do not want to pay high prices for designer merchandise. This gives the average consumers a chance to own the “it” designs and trends at a bargain price. Despite most Americans’ familiarity with this vicious cycle, with some even considering it the norm, its occurrence in other “artistic” fields, such as cinema, music, or literature, would be appalling. 

Even though all aspects of the fashion industry imply that fashion is a form of art, fashion designers cannot escape an early identification, categorizing fashion as the work of artisans. Due to fashion products’ artisan classification, historically designers did not receive intellectual property protections. Despite recent acceptance of fashion as an art form, fashion designers are still unable to escape the artisan stigma, preventing them from achieving the full breath of intellectual property (IP) protections afforded to other artistic fields. In the absence of IP protection, the knockoff industry thrives.

The Desire – Hindrance: 

The desire of the masses to enter into the world of the elite upper class is the real hindrance. Because that is what this fashion business eats on. Knockoff fashion designs help those who yearn to fit into popular social models by providing the “it” trends at a reduced cost. Although a controversy exists over whether knockoffs truly harm the fashion industry, deterring sales of high priced original items, piracy has become an undeniably prominent force in the industry. Fashion magazines seemingly promote knockoffs by devoting sections to enlighten readers on ways to acquire the latest trends at the lowest prices. 

If the fashion industry was afforded greater IP protection, individuals who cannot afford the high-end original products would be without recourse. This would ultimately result in a greater social divide between the upper and lower classes. Adopting the proposed regulation to outlaw knockoff merchandise will be an “uphill battle, since many shoppers see nothing wrong with knock-offs, especially as prices for designer goods skyrocket. Some even argue copies improve fashion, because they encourage designers to continuously invent new wares to stay ahead of the game.” 

The knockoff versions provide fashion followers with the ability to maintain their allegiance to fashion trends, especially in the current economic crisis, where individuals do not have spare money to spend on the elite fashion designers like Christian Louboutin, Chanel, Herve Leger and Dior.

Art Law in India:

The relevant concepts of Art law that would relate with the Fashion are as follows: 

• Copyright Law – Copyrights Act, 1957
• Trademark Law – Trademarks Act, 1999
• Design Law – Designs Act, 2000
• Patent Law – Patent Act, 1970
• GI Law – Geographical Indications Act, 1999
• Trade Secrets

The post Nexus between Fashion and Art Law appeared first on Fashion Law Journal.

To all those people, have you ever noticed that strange person with weird outfit and all you did was naming him/her as fashion illiterate? Or have you ever used the phrase ‘no fashion sense’? Then, I say, the fashion you know is not the real fashion, its consumerism. Being guided by that one person’s or one brand’s ideology, following the trends set by one model or one influencer, usage of phrases like ‘trend-setter’, ‘vintage’, ‘out-dated’ and all are exactly what I am talking about.

If fashion is about expressing yourself, then why are we running behind all those brands, trends or anything for that matter? Has the question “what’s true fashion?” misguided us? Did we ask this question by ourselves or did someone else put these words in our mouths?

The answer is, whatever they make us believe, at last the truth is Fashion is also an industry, it’s also a business. It also needs tactics and trends to survive. It always needs something new to lure us and earn profits. What are we doing? Falling prey to all those tactics and ending up with a closet full of unwanted material. I say, the colourful words of self-expressionism are just advertisement strategies and act as the primary step to build consumerism in fashion industry that increases their number of customers.

The enormous amount of time that’s available…Has this changed anything?

Now that I have made my point clear, I would like to ask a question. Has this mind-set of us, keeping up with trends and defining our happiness with the products we buy and wear, changed because of the pandemic or has pandemic played a hand in making that strong? Of course, no question has one single answer. This question too has different answers. It’s almost one and a half year of pandemic and all I can think of is how it has affected our mind-set. Not that every one’s mind-set is similar but the same pandemic has made us look at things differently as already mentioned.

Two different takes on one situation

Exploring ourselves:

Some of us think doing nothing also has its perks. It gave us the time to think about the worldly needs, pleasures, and different ideologies. It provided us with an opportunity to have a stand on the ongoing issues. And thus, we found ourselves comfortable in minimalistic mind-set. Why? With pandemic affecting the financial stability in each and every person’s life, most of us have found ourselves calculating everything based on our needs instead of wants.

To make my point understandable and basic, I would like to confine myself to dressing instead of discussing the entire fashion industry in this piece. It’s common knowledge that a number of people have found their comfort in casual wear. With this minimalistic ideology, we haven’t felt the need to wear branded outfits to find comfort. A casual pyjama has worked for us. Thus, we started questioning our unknown impulse to find happiness in branded outfits with already set accessories.

This one single question has cleared all our doubts and stopped us from being puppets of consumerism. How? The doubt has made us look into our individual happiness and what we want and not what others made us think we want. All those advertisements, all those influencers and all those brands aren’t affecting their happy hormones from that moment of realization. If this isn’t the effect of pandemic, then, what is?

Constant need to follow trends:

And then there are some of us who feel the need to dress up and look different. Our perceptions of dressing up for a particular occasion have come to a halt. The only occasion that’s available to us is to be in our homes. Now, a businessman is nothing if he doesn’t use an opportunity for his gain. With this pandemic being used as an opportunity, the strategies haven’t stopped but changed. The increase in trends, the increase in number of brand ambassadors, the increase in giving endorsements to those with huge number of followers, and the increase in online / digital shopping etc. are some of the strategies used for the rise in fashion industry.

And of course, all these strategies aren’t something bad and illegal and I am not suggesting them to be too. But, I would like to point out that these strategies are nothing but promoting consumerism. Suggesting only certain ways to dress up are the proper ways to dress up is nothing but consumerism. A popular way of doing business is to let the consumer think that it’s his own decision and at the same time tampering that decision-making process with the inclusion of all the trends, advertisements, and ideologies drafted by the businessmen themselves.

For example, in this pandemic, most of us have faced lockdowns and also unlockdowns phase-wise. There were moments in between all these phases where everything’s opened for a while. I remember the large discounts and sales that were offered in these gaps which were put before us as valuable opportunities that created an ultimatum for us to buy. These ultimatums will definitely create some hurdles in our free thinking thus giving them the chance to mould our thoughts into their convenience. This can be named as ‘Impulse Buying’ which is nothing but “purchasing a product on a whim. It’s not planned, not budgeted for and, often, it’s not needed. The goal is to create urgency for consumers to make a purchase, without giving us time to consider how useful the item actually is”[1] as defined by Michelle Chavez, an ethical fashion blogger.

Creating a situation where a consumer feels the need to buy one product even though there isn’t one in real is impulse buying and making a consumer feel that having such product in possession makes him happy is consumerism. And finally, it is the consumer who ends up falling into all these strategies and feeling the constant need. And thus, the pandemic helped the consumer to feel the need and it gave the opportunity to strengthen such need.

Then, is consumerism bad? What’s the final point?

There’s not one thing in this world that’s just good for all or bad for all. In the same way, the idea of consumerism is necessary for the fashion industry to survive. However, using it beyond a certain extent is not acceptable. Similarly, creating a situation of impulse buying isn’t ethical too. Using the true sense of fashion as the advertisement for only one particular trend isn’t ethical too. The point here is, before this pandemic, most of us haven’t got the time to think what’s real and what’s fake. We just fell into the ideas laid down using these consumerism tactics.

The pandemic, clearly, has changed a lot but not everyone experienced the same change in thought. Now, people are thinking before acting on impulse. However, there are some people who fell deep into these pits of consumerism too at the same time. The thing is the truth of the consumerism’s presence in the fashion industry has come into the light for some, and for some, it’s still lurking in the shadows behind the mask of colourful and branded luxuries.

Reference:

[1] https://www.vogue.in/fashion/content/how-to-control-impulse-buying-in-the-pandemic-era (last accessed: 29^th August 2021)

The post Consumerism, Pandemic and The Fashion Industry appeared first on Fashion Law Journal.