Fashion Law Journal

Tracking Luxury Symbols through the Decades and Years

Fashion Law Journal — Tue, 21 Jan 2025 07:10:01 +0000

Fashion has always been an indicator of status. The human brain experiences a phenomenon known as perception bias, where we subconsciously create shortcuts in our brain and make assumptions about others based on a mixture of indicia including appearance and clothing. Hence, it’s no surprise that luxury brands have become recognizable status symbols that the public strives to own.

This article will take you back through the decades to examine which luxury fashion items have been status symbols, and the trends that have come and gone.

1960s – Tiffany & Co.

Jewellery powerhouse Tiffany & Co. debuted their iconic Return to Tiffany collection in 1966. The success of Blake Edwards ‘Breakfast and Tiffany’s film starring Audrey Hepburn only furthered the brand’s success and standing, elevating their pieces into coveted status symbols. If you wanted to show off the fact, you had some spare cash lying around – a Tiffany diamond or signature heart pendant was the way to do it.

Source

1970s – The rise of the Rolex.

Having gained popularity in the 1950s and 1960s with the Submariner, Rolex watches were worn by mountaineers, divers and pilots alike, becoming a symbol of craftsmanship and achievement. But it was the 1970s that solidified Rolex’s status as a luxury watch, as celebrities such as Elvis Presley and Formula 1 champion Sir Jackie Stewart were seen sporting Rolex watches more and more often. Hence in the 1970s, the Rolex became a status symbol and was proudly worn by those who could acquire them.

Source

1980s – The Cartier Tank and Chanel’s revival.

Whilst the 1970s saw the rise of the Rolex, the 1980s saw another watch rising in status and popularity. The Cartier Tank saw a revival as a status symbol, as it was worn by high-profile individuals such as Lady Diana and Andy Warhol. This classic watch and its long history and status made it a coveted symbol of the wearer’s wealth and as such can be considered one of the luxury symbols of the 80s.

Source

The 80s also saw Karl Lagerfeld at the helm of Chanel’s revival, bringing back tweed suits and classic cardigans with tailored silhouettes, which quickly became symbols of class and status, along with the Chanel flap bag which remains an icon amongst luxury bags even today.

Source

1990s – The Lady Dior.

The 1990s saw the rise in popularity of the Lady Dior bag. Created in 1995, the bag was named after Princess Diana when she debuted it in Paris. After Lady Diana was seen carrying a mini-Lady Dior bag to the Met Gala in 1996 in blue satin, the bag quickly became a symbol of the height of luxury. After all, if it was the chosen bag of a princess, to own it, you must have been someone of note.

Source

2000s – Dior saddlebags and Burberry trench coats.

Christopher Bailey’s run as creative director of Burberry led to the return of their signature check pattern, and under his guidance, the brand’s reputation quickly recovered throughout the 2000s, and owning one of their iconic trench coats was seen as a symbol of status – that you could afford to splurge more on a coat with no visible logos on the outside. The Burberry trench to this day is still considered an ‘investment piece’ for consumers due to the durability of the coats, and remains a coveted status symbol amongst many.

Source

The early 2000s also saw the Dior Saddle become the decades’ ‘it bag’. Worn by style icons such as Paris Hilton and Jessica Parker, the bag was a success with women all around the world vying to get their hands on this bag. The Saddle quickly became an icon of luxury and status before demand subsided in 2007.

Source

2010s – Designer belts and the Cartier love bracelet.

The early 2010s saw a shift away from designer apparel and towards more affordable ‘entry-level’ accessories so that the average consumer could feel as if they were part of the luxury fashion world via more accessible pieces such as jewellery and belts.

The Gucci interlocking G belt was at the forefront of this shift – an instantly recognisable design associated with wealth yet priced more reasonably than their monogrammed bags. The presence of belts with flashy logos increased, and those in possession of these belts were recognised as of higher status in the eyes of the general public – as was the intention of the purchaser.

Source

Another example of this shift towards accessories is the Cartier love bracelet. Created in 1969 to symbolise permanent, lasting true love, the bracelet’s classic design and symbolism ensured that it cemented its status as one of the most recognisable pieces of designer jewellery in the world. In fact, in 2016, it was the most googled piece of jewellery in the world – a testament to its fame and rightful place in this article as a status symbol.

Source

2020 – Branded face masks.

2020 was a period where most consumers were in lockdowns and the presence of COVID-19 meant that face masks were the new every day. As such, they inevitably became fashion statements too, with many designer houses releasing branded face masks. Yes, everyone faced the same lockdowns and restrictions, but some did it with a Gucci or Louis Vuitton face mask to set themselves apart from the crowd.

Source

2021 – Chrome Hearts and Vivienne Westwood – costume jewellery.

2021 saw a resurgence in the popularity of Vivienne Westwood accessories, particularly the pearl chokers and earrings. Amongst Gen Z, Vivienne Westwood’s elegant yet edgy designs became an instant hit, and this popularity was fuelled by celebrities such as Dual Lipa and the growing popularity of media such as Nana. As Gen Z leant towards more unique designs, Vivienne Westwood’s orb charm became a new symbol of status.

Source

Los Angeles founded brand Chrome Hearts also saw a boom in popularity as Gen Z’s edgier aesthetic led to them searching for designer jewellery beyond the more elegant fashion houses of Cartier and Van Cleef. Known for their craftsmanship and limited quantities of products, Chrome Hearts accessories have quickly become another indicator of wealth and status, especially amongst the alternative and younger committees.

Source

2022 – Prada and Miu Miu

In 2022, most of Gen Z began entering the workforce and possessing enough disposable income to become a significant group of consumers for designer houses. As such, many of the new iconic luxury symbols of the year were catered towards the younger generation’s tastes. Prada and her sister brand Miu Miu were some of the leading brands in this Gen Z revolution, with their youthful yet classic designs. In particular, the Prada Cleo is seen amongst Gen Z as another status indicator, along with the Miu Miu mini skirt and kitten heels.

Source

2023 – The Birkin.

The Hermes Birkin is perhaps one of the most recognisable bags in fashion. Created in the 80s for Jane Birkin, the bag is Hermes’ piece de resistance and had waiting lists of up to 6 years, and whilst those waiting lists are no longer used, there is still a requirement of a large purchase history at Hermes until you may be offered one. The craftsmanship of these bags and their customizability means they are in high demand yet limited in their available quantities. Known as an ‘investment bag’, it has long been a status symbol and proof of the owner’s wealth. In 2023, TikTok and social media played a large role in increasing the reach of the Birkin, and celebrities such as the Kardashian-Jenner family have helped increase the bag’s visibility with the general public. Perhaps the crown jewel amongst other luxury bags, it can definitely be said that the Birkin has been and continues to be an iconic status symbol.

Source

2024 – The ‘old money’ aesthetic and Loro Piana.

2024 saw a return of more elegant, timeless, pieces, heavily driven by the ‘old money; aesthetic on platforms such as TikTok. As such, the status symbols of the year took a turn towards more understated designs, and one of the brands that skyrocketed in value in the eyes of the public was Loro Piana. Prior to 2024, very few of these ‘old money aesthetic’ individuals would have heard of Loro Piana, or been able to identify their designs on the streets, yet Loro Piana has become the ultimate status symbol for many of them. An ‘if you know, you know’ type of club. Popular items commonly found on Christmas wish lists from this ‘quiet luxury’ brand include: baseball caps, quarter-zip cashmere sweaters, and loafers.

Source

Another brand that benefited from the demand for timeless designs and sleek silhouettes was The Row, founded by Ashley and Mary-Kate Olsen. The Soft Margaux 15 Bag was recommended in countless articles and videos and compared even to the Birkin as a practical yet classic bag for the new generation entering the workforce, with their first bit of income that they feel comfortable spending on luxury items. Gen Z has turned back to the classics, choosing to invest in timeless pieces rather than trendy more temporal items, and as such, owning these timeless and classic designs has become the new symbol of status.

Even brands such as Rimowa, which do not come to the front of people’s minds when talking about luxury fashion, have seen an increase in traction. Rimowa’s 2024 campaign included celebrities such as Blackpink’s Rose and Formula 1 icon Lewis Hamilton, extending Rimowa’s reach and recognisability amongst the younger generation, who now view their suitcases as another luxury status symbol.

Source

2025 Predictions.

The internet is moving away from the idea of overconsumption now, so consumers are opting for more timeless and classic luxury pieces.

This coming year, we may see the return of classier silhouettes and more structured pieces – perhaps the return of Lagerfeld-influence tweed sets and Chanel bags.

Source

As people become more and more individualised and want to stand out – as seen by the ‘Jane Birkinfying my bag’ trend and the rising popularity of bag charms, could we perhaps see a return of the statement necklace? Vivienne Westwood has already proved to be a popular brand amongst the younger generations and that popularity won’t die out anytime soon.

Bag companies such as Coach are already leaning into the desire for individuality, with Coach’s cherry charm going viral at the end of 2024, and Loewe’s marketing of its bag charm animals. Perhaps luxury keychains and charms will be the new coveted items in 2025.

SOURCES

Author: Cheri Hui

Time Capsule: Successful and Failed Collaborations in Fashion

Fashion Law Journal — Mon, 20 Jan 2025 06:27:10 +0000

Whether it’s Gucci, Adidas or H&M, brands are no strangers to collaborations with each other and individual celebrities. In recent memory, there have been no shortage of fashion collaborations, and today, we’ll be going through some of the most memorable ones – whether it be because of their success or their failure. Success and failure is not measured entirely by profit margins – rather, we will consider whether the brands reputations were elevated by their collaborations, and whether these collaborations were trailblazers for their time, and their impact on future brand actions and marketing.

Success: Louis Vuitton x Murakami

Louis Vuitton is no stranger to collaborations, and one of their most famous and successful collaborations is with the artist Takashi Murakami. First released in the early 2000s, Murakami’s designs were worn by celebrities such as Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan and was a raging success. In fact, this collaboration was so successful that even 20 years onwards, the partnership remains strong. Murakami’s rainbow monogram is now one of Louis Vuitton’s most recognisable patterns and the bags are constantly in high demands. The collaboration was revolutionary at the time, thrusting Louis Vuitton into a new light – a more youthful and playful style that consumers were looking for. This collaboration was one of the most iconic between a brand and an artist, and since 2003, many other fashion houses have collaborated with artists, and Louis Vuitton has even gone on to collaborate with another Japanese artist, Yayoi Kusama, finding much success.

Source

Success: Adidas x Kanye West

Sportswear giant Adidas began collaborating with rapper Kanye West in 2014, creating a highly successful partnership with products such as the Yeezy sneaker in high demand. The Yeezy shoes were highly successful, and the partnership remained strong despite scattered controversy over the year. However, in October of 2022, West’s public remarks regarding Jews and the Black lives Matter movement led to irreparable damage to his reputation and Adidas cut ties with the rapper. Adidas had remained in the partnership due to the high profits, but since the end of the collaboration, have suffered a significant loss in profits. However, despite the controversy and sour ending to the collaboration, Yeezy’s did rake in over $2 billion in annual profit, making up 10% of the brand’s total revenue, and hence has been referred to as one of the most “successful collabs in history” by Adidas chief executive Bjorn Gulden.

Source

Success: Karl Lagerfeld x H & M

Karl Lagerfeld is no stranger to high fashion brands – but his collaboration with mass-market brand H&M in 2004 is listed here as a success not only for its sales numbers, but its legacy. The collaboration boosted H&M’s reputation, making luxury more accessible to the everyday consumer, and allowing Karl Lagerfeld to reach an audience beyond the members of higher society he had already captivated during his time at Chanel. Karl Lagerfeld changed H&M’s course of collaborations and they went on to collaborate with other designer brands such as Isabel Marrant and Moschino. The collaboration boosted the reputation of both parties and redefined the boundaries of collaborations, opening the door for previously ‘highbrow’ brands to reach the everyday audience.

Source

Failure: Loewe x Howl’s Moving Castle

In 2023, Spanish brand Loewe announced their collaboration with Howl’s Moving Castle – the well-loved Studio Ghibli film – coming off the success of their previous collaborations with other Studio Ghibli films such as My Neighbour Totoro and Spirited Away. Despite criticism about the pricing of the previous collections, their success was undeniable, resulting in a three-movie spanning collaboration. However, the Howls Moving Castle collaboration was criticised for being ridiculously priced and for lazy designs, with many feeling that by putting a family-friendly movie on their products, the pricing should reflect affordability for those families who enjoy the film. The designs were also criticised for lacking creativity, especially with regard to the printed bags. Whilst Loewe’s reputation and finances did not suffer exceptionally from this collaboration, it was markedly less successful than their previous collections and spoke to a lack of creativity and a focus on profits that the public and consumers heavily criticised.

Source

Failure: Tiffany & Co x Nike

When it comes to American brands, Tiffany & Co and Nike have established themselves at the forefront of the market. However, two powerhouse companies collaborating is not always a good idea and this 2023 collaboration proves it. Tiffany & Co has long been synonymous with elegance, class, and luxury, whilst Nike has always been a sports brand focused on athleticism and practicality over aesthetics. The release of Tiffany blue Nike Air Force shoes, a shoe horn, brush and whistle hence catered to two very separate markets. Those who fell into Nike’s demographic could not justify Tiffany’s price point for these items nor did they particularly feel a need to purchase the collection when Nike offered many of the same products from their own lines. Tiffany’s clientele also had little interest in the collaboration due to its sharp contrast to their usual products of jewellery and home décor. All in all, the collaboration was mismatched and finds a spot in this article as a failure.

Source

Failure: Skims x Swarovski

Kim Kardashian founded her shapewear brand Skims in 2019 and in part due to her fame, the brand found success in international markets. Skims has had a series of successful collaborations with brands such as Fendi. However, their 2023 collaboration with famed crystal company Swarovski left consumers perplexed. Swarovski is known for its jewellery and décor, and their venture into shapewear was a poor fit with the rest of their brand. The crystal-adorned catsuit and crystal net dresses were priced out of the average consumers reach, and most Skims wearers purchased the shapeware for its intended purpose – to be worn under clothes. This collaboration failed to reach the target audiences of both brands and was seen as a gimmick rather than a successful collaboration, especially as the prices in the collection went up to $3,300.

Source

Overall, there have been countless more collaborations in recent memory deserving of a place on this article. But collaborations will continue to happen between brands and due to the existing reputations of these companies, they will find consumers and demand for these collaborations and products. No collaboration will perfectly tailor to the consumers of both brands, but a combination of strong leadership vision and well researched marketing can prevent collaboration disaster and steer them towards success.

SOURCES:

Author name: Cheri Hui

Fashion Marketing Trends to Watch Out In 2025

Fashion Law Journal — Sat, 18 Jan 2025 05:30:12 +0000

Imagine scrolling through virtual stores of your favorite brands which are curated by AI based on your taste, mood, past preferences and money moves. Welcome to 2025, where fashion is not confined to just the runways. It’s on your phone, it’s in your surroundings, it’s basically in the air and everywhere; and influenced by creators you have never met. Fashion marketing is more personal, immersive and obviously, more tech-driven than ever before. It’s not just selling clothes anymore, it’s selling experiences that deeply resonate with the consumer’s lifestyle, values and aspirations. As sustainability becomes non-negotiable and technology has taken a center stage, the fashion industry has leaned into storytelling, hyper-personalization and internet engagements to redefine how consumers interact with brands. Whether it’s through CGIs, TikTok or brand trips, brands are leaving no stone unturned to go all out.

Whether you are a marketer, a brand, or a fashion or business student, understanding the viral trends around you is vital to stay relevant. We have curated a list of some key fashion marketing trends, to look watch out for in 2025, to keep you updated and in trend.

Luxury Brands are keeping it Unreal

Brands are leveraging Computer-Generated Imagery (CGI) to create realistic (or too unrealistic?) marketing campaigns that leave the viewers awestruck. In this fast-moving digital world, capturing the audience’s attention withing few seconds is the real deal, and some brands appear to get it just right. Brands like Jacquemus’ and Maybelline created quite a stir online when they launched their CGI creations on Instagram a while back. Whether it was Maybelline’s Sky High Mascara being applied to London’s tube train, or Jacquemus’ Bambino bags cruising the streets of Paris, what really is special about these marketing techniques is the ability to make these campaigns memorable and leave the viewers wondering whether it’s AI or a real thing. Many Indian and global beauty brands have recognized the untapped potential of these techniques and have done similar campaigns, like Fae Beauty and Papa Don’t Preach. We see numerous other brands employing CGIs in 2025 to make breathtaking campaigns and unleash the power of technology.

2. Pet Influencer Marketing: Even your dog gets a Dyson!

Personalized premium pet-care products for influencer parents is the level of customization that brands are willing to go to, to attract wealthy, trend-savvy shoppers. So, the next time you see a video of a dog using Dyson, or a $99 Dolce & Gabbana dog perfume, or an expensive skincare routine, don’t be too shocked. Apparently, pet influencer marketing is not just a thing, it actually helps the brands attract more visibility in their desired audience.

3. Brand Trips

Although the concept of Brand Trips is not entirely new, it has again gained momentum recently with the rise of influencer marketing and social media. Brands like Benefits Cosmetics and Tarte have pioneered the art of brand trips, flying influencers off to dreamy, exotic locations to flood our feeds with swoon-worthy content. Initially started as simple products, promos have now evolved into full-blown immersive experiences that do more than just sell—they create emotional connections between brands, influencers, and their audiences. These trips are no longer just about showing off products; they’re about building a story, blending luxury, adventure, and unforgettable moments that keep everyone talking (and posting). It’s marketing but make it a vacation!

4. Fake scarcity

Driving consumer demand by creating a sense of urgency that reinforces exclusivity is how fake scarcity has become a clever strategy in fashion marketing. By releasing limited-edition items or restricting product availability to specific timeframes, brands tap into the psychology of FOMO, compelling shoppers to act quickly. In India, brands like Sabyasachi leverage this tactic by releasing highly coveted bridal collections in limited quantities, creating a frenzy among customers eager to own a piece of the designer’s legacy. Luxury labels like Gucci and Louis Vuitton launch capsule collections with highly limited stock. This approach not only heightens desirability but also strengthens a brand’s prestige, as owning these rare pieces becomes a status symbol among fashion enthusiasts.

5. Advent Calendars

Advent calendars have created a niche in the holiday playbook marketing for brands to excite their customers with their curated calendars. Designed to celebrate the season, these calendars offer a daily reveal of mini accessories, skincare or exclusive collectibles. Influencers’ daily unboxings of Dior opulent calendars filled with travel-sized perfumes and beauty products have enticed consumers with limited-edition items they can’t resist. The cult-favourite Charlotte Tilbury has also hopped onto this trend, blending fashion and beauty to create holiday keepsakes. Content creators partnering with these brands create a special appeal with their videos. They enhance the calendars’ desirability and spark social media buzz as followers eagerly tune to daily reveals.

Conclusion

In 2025, Fashion Marketing Trends is all about serving creativity with deeper customer connections. From mind-blowing CGIs to hyper customized PR boxes, brands are going all out to show they really care about their impressions. This year, we believe is going to be the year of experiments, tech innovations and surprises that would revolutionize fashion marketing. It’s clear fashion is no longer just about clothes; it’s about delivering unforgettable experiences. The future of fashion marketing is promising, bold and impossible to ignore.

Author: Ambreen Imam, 5th Year Law Student, UPES Dehradun

Anti Trust Laws and Fashion Industry

Fashion Law Journal — Fri, 17 Jan 2025 09:55:32 +0000

Competition policies are essential in fighting monopolistic practices, ensuring that industries are competitive, and guaranteeing consumer welfare in the fashion industry. The biggest luxury fashion firms that are publicly traded include the Puig Company, LVMH, Richemont, Kering Group, Tapestry, Inc., and Prada Group. These multibillion-dollar companies provide financial support and creative freedom to several fashion and luxury firms. Despite maintaining prestigious brands and stabilizing luxury fashion sales, these corporations’ dominance can stifle competition. They may hinder innovation and diversity in the sector by making it harder for up-and-coming houses to obtain independent financial support. Fashion firms see the capacity to regulate product distribution as critical to maintaining the image and economic worth of the luxury brand (McGill, 2024)

Anti-Trust Laws are different in different nations like the United Kingdom has the Competition Act of 1998 and Enterprise Act of 2002, United States’s applicable laws are the Sherman Antitrust Act (1890), Clayton Act (1914), and the Federal Trade Commission Act (1914) the other hand Dubai (United Arab Emirates relevant legislation consists of UAE Competition Law (Federal Law No. 4 of 2012 and Implementing Regulations (2014), In India, the Competition Act, 2000 seeks to foster a healthy market environment by protecting and balancing the interests of enterprises, consumers, and the economy. Lower yet competitive pricing enables consumers to make educated judgments about the substitute items they want to buy, while also guaranteeing that no company exploits its dominant status. Diverse viewpoints exist on antitrust law in the fashion sector. Antitrust rules, according to some, are crucial for fostering competition and shielding customers from monopolistic tactics. However, others contend that antitrust rules can impede lawful corporate operations and be too restrictive. When assessing the function of antitrust legislation in the fashion sector, it is critical to take these conflicting perspectives into account.

In a classic case of Hermes Class Action Suit, California residents and consumers Tina Cavalleri and Mark Glinoga filed a class action antitrust complaint against Hermès, charging that the company engages in unlawful tying by conditioning the sale of a Birkin or Kelly handbag on the purchase of other ancillary products. Hermès sales associates receive no commissions on handbag sales but are instructed to use the handbags as a means to coerce consumers into buying ancillary products. As alleged in the complaint, extraordinary desirability, phenomenal demand, and limited supply of Birkin handbags endow Hermès with extraordinary market power. Hermès moves to dismiss the action, contending that the complaint fails to define a plausible tying market in which Hermès could exercise the alleged market power. The case will probably depend on proper relevant market definition and raises an interesting question about how the appropriate delineation of the relevant market should occur when the alleged competition involves luxury goods. (McGill, 2024) We can understand the subtleties of antitrust laws in the fashion business by taking into account different viewpoints examining significant figures, and talking about both the advantages and disadvantages.

Author name: Pratikshya Mishra,4th-year Law Student

I’m Pratikshya Mishra, a 4th-year law student with a deep love for both fashion and law. I enjoy exploring how the two intersect, often drawing inspiration from fashion movies to connect them with the legal field in creative ways. Outside of my academic pursuits, I’m passionate about dancing and an enthusiastic sports lover.

The Wage War: Discussing The Pay Gap in the Fashion Industry

Fashion Law Journal — Thu, 16 Jan 2025 08:50:46 +0000

The Pay discrepancy is a media-fuelled discussion that has unearthed several issues within all industries. The turbulent relationship between the fashion industry and wages, owing to sweatshops in Bangladesh and Child labour in Sri Lanka has noticed many more layers in the past years. Simply put, a pay discrepancy or the pay gap is discrimination, usually based on gender, between pay scales, with male workers receiving higher wages than their female colleagues. Not only at the baseline level, but the executives, models and fashion influencers all inevitably fall under the bandwidth of this negative phenomenon. This article explores the evolution of pay discrepancies in multiple spheres, from the origination of the Fashion industry to modern-day feminism. Along with this, key legal developments and legislations are explored, including landmark precedents and violations by industry leaders.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE PAY DISCREPANCY

The wage disparity between men and women has been noticed as early as World War I. The textile-clothing industry, an ever-booming industry, had significant distinctions between the wages paid to male and female workers. The reported wage for men is $10.10 while female workers earn $7.94. Although it may not appear to be as significant of a variance, the modern-day values portray a noteworthy distinction between $350 (approximately) and an estimated $275.27 for women. While external factors of age, English speaking abilities etc. were far more likely to justify the wage gap, a negative correlation between gender and pay can be inferred from our history.

In 1969, the industrialised United States observed more riveting figures to a 42% variation between standardised wages. The study by McGouldrick and Tannen further reported that education as a market signal provided a third of a percentage greater increase for men than women. The institution of marriage, usually a sacred union, was yet another factor where men were awarded a substantial increase in wages, while the opposite subsisted for women.

Focusing on the European Union, in particular, the European Structure of Earnings Survey reported an average wage discrepancy of 24.15%. While pre-pandemic Asia underwent even more riveting figures. The highest figure reported being 64.5% in Pakistan, with India following close behind with a 34.6% pay distinction. The breakdown of the Fashion industry into Garment, Textile and Footwear, as observed by the International Labour Organisation, displayed diverse ranges of wage dissimilarities, particularly in Bangladesh and Vietnam.

Gender and Ethnicity is a puzzling intersection. Men and Women being discriminated against by their “white” counterparts is one side of the spectrum. The additional layer of discrimination is noticed by variations in the pay received by “Ethnic” men and women.

Immigrant men are the most disadvantaged of all groups, with nearly half of the native employees. In particular, the Bangladeshi immigrants and the Pakistani immigrants bear the brunt of this. Although the discrepancy is not as huge, the Bangladeshi and Pakistani women, too are prey to this.

This indicates that the “Gender Pay Gap”, beyond the shields of “Male Chauvinism”, impacts both men and women. Not only ethnicity, but the modelling industry, an essential lifeboard to sustain the Fashion Industry, indulges in such unethical practices blatantly. In such industries, men have been reported to receive 75% less pay than female models. The productivity figures, which are often used to justify the pay discrepancies in the production process, are often stated as key contentions as to why female models receive a higher pay. This variance, however, may be a thing of the past soon. With a rise in male designers, catering only to male segment of the audience, through male models, has led to an overall increase in demand and thus pay.

Within the female modelling industry, ageism is a prominent phenomenon for discrimination. Ageism is prejudice against the older workers in an industry, often demonstrated through a reduced pay and cascading opportunities. Younger Female models, often up to the age of 25 are “in their prime”, with a steady downturn noticed as they age. These women are subjected to a lower “shelf life” and experience a negative correlation between age and pay scales. This is yet another phenomenon which creates a stark distinction, facilitating unethical business practices.

LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS

Key legal strides globally have embarked to provide equity to those dejected and underserved. The Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 is a notable step taken by the Indian Government. This act, as the name states, seeks to enhance the standard of living by regulating wage discrepancies. Moreover, this is in consonance with The Constitution of India, overall inculcating a sense of pay parity. Denmark’s Equal Pay Act of 1976 is yet another reformatory step to uplift women. This act builds a framework of accountability by requiring companies with over 35 employees to provide “sex-disaggregated pay data”. External government auditing and interpretation has paved a rectification mechanism.

The United Kingdom’s Equality Act 2010 (Gender Pay Gap Information) Regulations, 2017 is a similar regulation to Denmark. However, the mandate to report pay data based on gender begins with 250 employees in an organisation.

The National Labour Rights Act in the United States of America, the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Act, of 2020 in Norway, The Labour Code of The Republic of Lithuania, The Gender Wage Reforms in Iceland, and the Swedish Discrimination Act, all seek to promote the same goal- eliminate gender-based wage discrimination by holding corporations accountable for their actions.

MODERN-DAY SCENARIO

A pertinent question here is, whether positive social developments have eradicated the issue at hand. While the women in the workplace have fought tirelessly for a seat at the table, more often than not, lower salaries act as another barrier. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), women earn 73 cents for every dollar a man earns. This figure can stoop to as low as 44 cents for every dollar in low-income, developing economies. Not only this but also Present-Day fashion corporations, with a major proportion of the target audience being women, follow the age-old orthodox way of business.

One of the oldest fashion houses, Burberry, follows a staggering 26% pay gap based on gender, signifying that women earn a quarter less than men. Forever New, the retail fashion brand reports a 49% wage gap between male and female workers. Designer Karen Millen has reported figures similar to those of Forever New. Benefit Cosmetics reported a 30.7% wage gap while Pandora Jewellery reports

Not all hope is lost, The PVH House, owners of Calvin Klien and Tommy Hilfiger, undertakes inclusionary measures to ensure men and women are on an equal footing. The PVH reports disclosing the pay parity explicitly state objectives towards ensuring equity in the workplace.

Adidas has taken stern measures, engaging in collaborations to “make 20 per cent count”, while VFH and Gap Inc. have reported strong figures, suggesting regulatory compliance and pay parity.

LANDMARK LAWSUITS

Despite regulations, bewildering figures are reported by companies across the globe. Lawsuits thus are deemed to be an inevitable consequence of reality.

Cahill et al v. Nike Inc. is an infamous gender discrimination case that gave rise to the slogan “Just pay it”. This case mandated Nike to release wage data and statistical figures that are in violation of The Federal Pay Act, The Oregon Equal Pay Act and The Oregon Equality Act. This accountability seeks to provide justice to over 300 women discriminated against, not just for wage/pay scales, but also for promotions and Job assignments. Shahi Exports in India, supplying several international corporations including Gap, Zara, H&M and Marks and Spencer, faced a significant wage dispute in 2022, due to which the company agreed to pay backdated wages to over 80,000 workers.

Etro, the Italian fashion house, was yet another company that was served a lawsuit for its discriminatory practices. Discriminatory hiring practices, racism and unfair treatment towards those disabled were one side of the coin, on the flip side, claims of consistent unequal pay between men and women were contested.

CONCLUSION

Despite regulations, awareness and activism, the state of affairs remains bleak. Companies, in a hunt for profit, adopt dubious practices. While education and experience may act as a palpable market signal, the extent of its notoriety is challenged. Perhaps a mindset shift is necessary, or stricter regulations, trade union strikes or providing those affected a platform to protest. Several different anecdotes may be adopted to eradicate this issue. In a utopian world, such deep rooted obstacles may be resolved overnight, however, in the dynamic and over competitive fashion industry, this war is an ever-lasting reality, one which will take years to conquer.

SOURCES-

McGouldrick, Paul & Tannen, Michael. (1980). The Increasing Pay Gap for Women in the Textile and Clothing Industries, 1910 to 1970. The Journal of Economic History. 40. 799-814: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227400987_The_Increasing_Pay_Gap_for_Women_in_the_Textile_and_Clothing_Industries_1910_to_1970

Comparing Apples with Oranges, Revisiting the Gender Wage Gap in an International Perspective:

https://docs.iza.org/dp1449.pdf

Asia Pacific Garment and Footwear Sector Research Note, Issue 4:

https://asiagarmenthub.net/resources/2021/gender-pay-gaps-persist-in-asia2019s-garment-and-footwear-sector.pdf

Equality and Human Rights Commission, Issue 108, Pay Gaps Research:

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/research-report-108-the-ethnicity-pay-gap.pdf

Gender wage transparency and the gender pay gap: A survey: https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12545

Pay Transparency Policies can reduce the gender pay gap: The case of Denmark and the United Kingdom: https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/developmenttalk/pay-transparency-policies-can-reduce-the-gender-pay-gap–the-cas#:~:text=Pay%20transparency%20mechanisms%20include%20mandatory,and%20“naming%20and%20shaming.”

Cahill et al v. Nike, Inc:

https://gbdhlegal.com/cases/cahill-et-al-v-nike-inc/

Indian supplier to UK fashion brands agrees to pay £3m in unpaid wages

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/feb/11/indian-supplier-to-uk-fashion-brands-agrees-to-pay-3m-in-unpaid-wages

The other side of the pay gap: male models paid significantly less than female counterparts:https://ww.fashionnetwork.com/news/The-other-side-of-the-pay-gap-male-models-paid-significantly-less-than-female-counterparts,736480.html

Author(s):

Meet Kanishka Chawla, an academically driven student at NMIMS School of Law, Mumbai. Kanishka strives for excellence in every field she is working in and overcomes challenges by providing pragmatic solutions. Enthusiastic about fashion, Kanishka brings a legal perspective to a creatively fuelled industry.

10 Must-Watch Fashion Web Series to Add to Your 2025 New Year’s Resolutions

Fashion Law Journal — Mon, 06 Jan 2025 06:40:38 +0000

Along with the 2025 New Year’s Resolutions, new shows should be added to that list explicitly about fashion. Here are 10 fashion web series you should add to your list of things to do in 2025.

Girlboss

In this web series that can be watched on Netflix produced by Sophia Amoruso, Britt Robertson plays Sophia Marlowe, who started selling vintage clothing online. The once-side hustle turns into an unexpected multi-million dollar fashion business known as NastyGal, which recognizes some challenges.

Dress my Tour

In the series created by Holly Carter and hosted by Kate Upton, 11 fashion designers compete to make their break in the industry and win a grand prize of $100,000. Each episode features different celebrities for whom the designers have to create an outfit, including names like Coi Leray and Paula Abdul, the series can be accessed on Hulu.

My Unorthodox Life

A fashion web series that can be watched on Netflix follows Julia Haart, a former member of the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community. The episodes show Julia’s life as the former CEO of fashion talent management Elite World Group, her family life, and Paris Fashion Week.

The Collection

Two brothers known as Paul (Richard Coyle) and Claude Sabine (Tom Riley) are in charge of a fashion house after World War II. There is a lot of focus on the fashion scene in Paris after World War II, along with the search for former Nazi collaborators. Paul has an outgoing personality and business acumen, while Claude has an artistic, introverted personality and wants his creative work recognized by his family. This series is offered on Amazon Originals- Prime Video.

Geek Girl

Once seen as the school’s outcast, Harriet Manner’s (Emily Carey) life changes within a few days after accidentally bumping into some mannequins while trying on hats, which led two model scouts to discover her and have her audition to become the next face of fashion designer Yuji Lee (Sandra Yi Sencindiver). The series shows her life as a model while she travels to Canada and opens the runway, as well as her best friend Natalia’s (Rochelle Harrington) talent for fashion design. This web series is offered on Netflix.

Photo by Nina Hill on November 26th, 2022.

La Maison (The House)

The fictional family-owned fashion house Ledu faces internal drama and scandals that push the family to recreate their image to keep a strong reputation, based on an original idea by producer Alex Berger. The series can be accessed on AppleTV+.

Kaiser Karl (Becoming Karl Lagerfeld)

The fashion series accessed on Disney+ Hotstar shows Karl Lagerfeld’s (Daniel Brühl) early career and rise to the Paris fashion industry in the 1970s. It focuses on his professional rivalry with Yves Saint Laurent (Arnaud Valois), his relationship with Jacques de Bascher (Théodore Pellerin), and his personal struggles while becoming one of the most successful designers.

In Vogue: The 90s

The fashion series that can be accessed on Disney+ Hotstar shows the fashion world in the 1990s as Vogue’s editor-in-chief, Anna Wintour, takes over Vogue. Tom Ford, Naomi Campbell, Anna Wintour, Edward Enninful, Tonne Goodman, and Hamish Bowles share their stories and perspectives of their lives in the fashion industry in the 1990s.

Worn Stories

The fashion series that can be accessed on Netflix shares heartfelt stories about people’s clothes and the story behind each piece they wear. People show that fashion has more significance than just simply being worn.

Halston

Produced by Ryan Murphy, the fashion series that can be watched on Netflix is based on a true story that explores Roy Halston’s (Ewan McGregor) rise as one of America’s prominent designers, his fashion empire, and his fall.

Author : Salomée Levy, Intern, Fashion Law Journal (Jan’25)

Fashion on Air: The 10 Must-Listen Podcasts for Style Enthusiasts

Fashion Law Journal — Sat, 04 Jan 2025 07:11:49 +0000

Fashion podcasts can provide inspiration for a new wardrobe, secrets of the fashion industry, and topics such as history and philosophy that can be discussed in conversation with fashion. Here are 10 fashion podcasts that you should listen to as soon as you put on your headphones.

Climbing in Heels with Rachel Zoe

Star celebrity wardrobe stylist Rachel Zoe created this fashion podcast to interview other fashion stylists, such as Erin Walsh, Oscar de la Renta’s Co-Creative Director Fernando Garcia, and makeup mogul Bobbi Brown. The host interviews a variety of people who share challenges they faced on their journey, along with personal, heartfelt stories and memorable lessons.

The Glossy Podcast

Glossy’s editor-in-chief, Jill Manoff, explores how the economy and global events affect the industry, expected business trends, and mergers, including the recent Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus merger. Some episodes also feature special guests sharing secrets of success in the fashion industry!

Dressed: The History of Fashion

History books do not cover much about fashion during a specific event, but this podcast, hosted by fashion historians April Calahan and Cassidy Zachary, shows moments such as the French Revolution sparking new fashion statements, the fast fashion of the 1960s, and messages Lady Diana was sharing through her clothing.

A Fashion Law Dinner Party with Fashion by Felicia

Attorney Felicia Caponigri gathers with fashion archivists, lawyers practicing IP law, lawyers representing brands, and curators to discuss whether France provides more legal protection to fashion designs than the United States, why artists can reinterpret the American flag with their patterns, the law’s impact on classical movies including icons like Audrey Hepburn, Latinx fashion along with topics combining the legal area with heritage and fashion creation.

Fashion People with Lauren Sherman

Puck correspondent Lauren Sherman describes what is currently happening in the fashion industry. She explains the fall of magazines, a summary of luxury brands, and young people’s sudden obsession with furniture instead of fashion. She also dives into current events, such as a potential TikTok ban that could affect several fashion brands.

Captured by cottonbro studio on October 21st, 2020

Thoughtful Threads: A Fashion Philosophy Podcast

Jenn Celeste hosts this fashion podcast and does more than talk about fashion. She links fashion to society and culture with episodes that discuss the silent power of uniforms, explains how luxury shopping may be considered a dystopian nightmare, or how people are drawn to the exclusivity of luxury such as the Hermè’s Birkin bag.

The Museum at FIT Fashion Culture Podcast

This fashion podcast, hosted by the Museum at Fashion Institute of Technology in New York City, provides a unique combination of fashion’s history and evolution, with topics including Africa’s fashion diaspora, Alexander McQueen’s story, the rise of Simon Porte Jacquemus, and the history of “Mexican pink” being used by Mexican architects and designers.

Let’s Get Dressed

Fashion insider Liv Perez offers tips and tricks for building a stylish wardrobe. With her knowledge of runway trends and fashion advice, you will never be in a dilemma about how to wear your next outfit.

Articles of Interest

Created by Avery Trufelman, this fashion podcast explores various topics, including luxury, the influence of American Ivy Leagues in fashion, religion in fashion, and the history of jeans and Aloha shirts.

The Fashion is Cool Podcast

Brainchild Next’s founder, Dwight Carter, created this fashion podcast by interviewing influencers, designers, manufacturers, and stylists to paint a large picture of the fashion industry with guests including Lux and Nyx’s owner Lisa Hu, and Neiman Marcus’s Brand Experience Lead Caira Butler.

Author : Salomée Levy, Intern, Fashion Law Journal (Jan’25)

Top Ten Legal Battles of 2024

Fashion Law Journal — Wed, 01 Jan 2025 04:35:10 +0000

The fashion industry looks a little bit like this: Behind pristine windows showcasing glamorous dresses and trendsetting shoes is a backroom of competitive business and complex lawsuits. Big brands, in efforts to protect their most innovative designs (and the commercial benefits that come with them), often find themselves locked in legal disputes over intellectual property rights. This encompasses everything from copyright to trademark issues to patent licensing and event geographical indications – anything under the sun that ensures the creative genius of fashion creators is protected from plagiarism.

As we dive into the whirlwind of 2024, it’s clear that this year has been as tumultuous as any, with the fashion world continuing to expand and evolve. Legal battles are becoming increasingly intricate as fashion law and regulation advance at a rapid pace. With 2025 just around the corner, let’s take a look back at the Top 10 Legal Battles of 2024 to gain insight into the future landscape of fashion law.

Griffin v. Guess?, Inc.

Fashion retailer Guess was accused of unauthorised use of graffiti tags for their graffiti-inspired clothing line in January 2024. The street artists, whose graffiti was used, filed this lawsuit with the claim that Guess’s actions constituted intellectual property theft in an “effort to lend credibility and an air of urban cool” to their clothing line through the unlicensed and nonconsensual use of the unique graffiti and street art created by these artists. In particular, a big issue arises with the artists’ reputations being injured when consumers are falsely led to believe that the artists had collaborated with Guess, earning them insults branding them as “corporate sellouts” who have “traded their artistic independence, legacy, and credibility for a quick buck.” Although this case has a long line of predecessors with fashion giants such as Coach, The North Face, H&M and American Eagle Outfitters also having had found themselves in disputes with renowned street artists, it is too early to predict an outcome from this case.

Tina Cavalleri et al v. Hermes International

On 19 March, two Californian shoppers filed a class-action lawsuit against Hermes, spurred by their failed attempts to buy the ever-so exclusive Birkin Bag. Their complaint regarding the company’s violation of antitrust law was built on the grounds that Hermes was withholding the bag to only be sold to the highest-spending consumers. Cavalleri argues that the hefty sum of money she had spent on Hermes was used to buy what she describes as “ancillary products” that she “had been coerced into purchasing” in her efforts to buy a Birkin Bag. The problem here lies in the practice of “tying”. By reserving exclusive items from consumers until they fulfill the condition to buy other products from the same business, Hermes runs into dangerous territory in regards to antitrust law. The outcome of this litigation may very well set a vital precedent for other luxury brands such as Rolex and Porsche that have built business strategies around the concept of “tying”

Federal Trade Commission v. Tapestry Inc. and Capri Holdings

This October, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) achieved a preliminary injunction against Tapestry Inc.’s acquisition of Capri Holdings. The FTC argued that this merger would reduce competition in the “accessible luxury” handbag market. A key issue in the case was the definition of “accessible luxury,” which the FTC characterized as a market segment located between “mass-market” and “true luxury” handbags. Judge Rochon, who presided over the case, accepted this definition. He noted that text messages exchanged between executives from Tapestry Inc. and Capri Holdings, wherein they dismissed the idea of competing with “true luxury” brands, indicated an anti-competitive stance from the companies. Ultimately, the FTC’s success in this case has significant implications for future antitrust matters, as it may encourage the FTC to adopt a more aggressive approach in scrutinizing other mergers by challenging product market definitions.

Levi Strauss & Co. v. Brunello Cucinelli USA

The iconic rectangular pocket tab trademarked by Levi Strauss & Co. became a point of contention when the Italian luxury fashion house Brunello Cucinelli began using “nearly identical copies” of this design. Filed in January 2024, Levi’s lawsuit argued that Brunello Cucinelli’s usage of the design would dilute their brand identity and confuse consumers, especially since the trademark for these red tabs dates back to 1938. Although the details of the settlement reached on May 7 remain confidential, this case underscores the importance of protecting intellectual property in the fashion industry, emphasizing attention to logos, designs, and labels, rather than solely focusing on final products.

Rhode-NYC, LLC v. Rhodedeodato Corp

Rhode-NYC, LLC was established in 2014, and in 2022, celebrity Hailey Bieber launched her skincare line called Rhode. Interestingly, Bieber’s team had previously approached Rhode-NYC to acquire the trademark name, but the request was refused. Following the launch of Bieber’s skincare line, Rhode-NYC filed a lawsuit against Bieber for trademark infringement and unfair market competition, arguing that her use of the name Rhode would confuse consumers. On March 2024, this trademark infringement lawsuit (which was initially filed in 2022) was reopened by Judge Hellerstein of the Southern District of New York. Eventually, Rhode and Bieber reached a confidential settlement, allowing both parties to continue using the name Rhode for their respective brands. This outcome indicates an increasing trend towards coexistence agreements in resolving trademark disputes within the fashion industry, a trend likely to persist in the future.

Lululemon Greenwashing Lawsuit

In July 2024, environmental advocacy organisation Stand.eart files a complaint against Lululemon for its greenwashing of its products. Filed on the basis that Lululemon’s ‘Be Planet’ campaign misleads consumers into believing in the company’s effort in “restorig a healthy planet”, Lululemon is criticised for its greater contribution to climate pollution, releasing “more planet-harming emissions every year than half a million cars.” This misleading branding leads Lululemon into trouble with the French Consumer Code as these claims constitute a misleading commercial practice. Moving forward, it can be seen that the rising demand for sustainability within the fashion industry may have prompted businesses such as Lululemon to make themselves out to be much more green than they actually are in reality. Following this, the increasing action by NGOs as well as other stakeholders to combat greenwashing, particularly that of large companies, becomes much more explainable.

Shein v. Temu

With a history of lawsuits exchanged between Shein and Temu, Shein filed a fresh new lawsuit in August 2024 with the claim that Temu is “an unlawful enterprise built on counterfeiting, theft of trade scerets, infringement of intellectual property rights, and fraud.” Breaking this down, much of Shein’s complaints centered around the sale of Shein knock-off products that were allegedly produced from the procurement of Shein trade secrets by Temu employees. Moving on, the creation of fake Shein accounts on social media by Temu employees and the use of the Shein trade marks in Google ads to promote Temu were also activities criticised by Shein as fraudulent behaviour intending to “misdirect customers away from the Shein platform to the Temu platform”. Despite this, Shein has caught much fire for suing Temu over the very copyright infringment activities it has also been accused of engaging in by other fashion brands in the past.

Johnna Pomasan v. Alvin Valley

In October 2024, Palm Beach businesswoman Johnna Pomasan filed a lawsuit against fashion designer Alvin Valley, claiming that he had scammed her and her husband into loaning 640,000 dollars to the fashion brand Alvin Valley. Approached in Spring 2023, Johnna and her husband had agreed to the loan under the false impression that Velly would honour the convertible promissory notes used to secure the loan. As of December 2024, though the case remains ongoing, it still draws attention to the challenges of financing as well as the vulnerability of investors within the fashion industry. Moving forward, there could be some new efforts by regulatory bodies to tighten regulations for private fundraising practices within creative industries such as in fashion.

Benefit Cosmetics, LLC v. E.L.F. Cosmetics, Inc.

In December 2024, Judge Richard Seeborg ruled in favour of E.L.F. Cosmetics in a lawsuit filed by Benefit Cosmetics. Benefit had claimed that E.L.F.’s “Lash ‘N Roll Mascara” infringed on its trademark for the Roller Lash Mascara. The court determined that Benefit did not provide sufficient evidence that consumers were confused between the two products. Specifically, the ruling highlighted that intent to copy a product does not necessarily imply intent to deceive consumers. This case sets a precedent for companies suing competitors for trade dress infringement and emphasizes the need for solid proof that product similarities are likely to confuse consumers.

Federal Trade Commission v. Amazon

In May 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a lawsuit against Amazon, alleging that the company was trying to monopolize the online retail market. The FTC’s main arguments centred on claims that Amazon was overcharging consumers, increasing seller fees, and advertising in a manner that degraded its service. However, these claims contradict commercial data analyzed by Dr. George S. Ford, Chief Economist at the Phoenix Center, which indicates that Amazon’s prices were approximately 3.5% lower than those of Walmart and Target. Dr Ford’s analysis suggests that the FTC’s claims may be unfounded and points to a potential setback for the neo-Brandeisian antitrust movement, which argues against the existence of large companies as inherently harmful. Regardless of the outcome, the FTC’s lawsuit against Amazon is likely to have a lasting impact on the future of antitrust enforcement.

Author Name: Arianna Saiful

Avoid an Identity Crisis, The Jungian Way!

Fashion Law Journal — Tue, 31 Dec 2024 04:30:04 +0000

In a competitive market, consumer loyalty is favourable, yet inconceivable. Companies are required to go beyond the traditional price and quality considerations and build strong emotional connections. This is where Jungian psychology is a useful guide for brands.

This article delves into the importance of implementing a brand personality. Moreover, the varied kinds of brand personalities, as provided by the Jungian psychology of Brand Archetypes, has been discussed extensively, citing an example of companies successfully implementing this.

Carl Jungian, the psychologist who coined the term “Brand Archetypes” has provided 12 distinguished brand identities, namely- The outlaws, The Magician, The Hero, The Lover, The Jester, The Everyman, The Creator, The Ruler, The Caregiver, The Sage, The Innocent and The Explorer.

This is not merely a marketing strategy, but a way to connect with the audience and communicate just how the product adds to their quality of life and how it seeks to be a part of their journey as well as highlighting the distinguishing factors. With cutthroat competition being an inevitable scenario, the need for developing a brand identity is more imperative than ever. Consumers’ perception of a product, and in turn, a brand, directly correlates with the likelihood of purchases, prospect of loyalty and word of mouth.

This further creates a relatability factor, drawing parallels between the brand image and the target audience, acting as an unspoken web of emotional connection that draws the customer to a particular company. This creates familiarity with a brand, whilst evoking feelings of belongingness and understanding.

The primary brand archetypes are bifurcated based on the vision of a company. It is pertinent to note that a company may fall under several archetypes. This, however, does not deter from the intention of illustrating an identity but merely states that the strategies undertaken fulfil the criteria for more than one subset.

Companies focusing on leaving a legacy, usually catering generations, fall under a category with 3 predominant archetypes, namely, The Outlaw, The Magician and The Hero.

The Outlaws, represented by the colour yellow, communicate and encourage liberation, risk-taking & independence for their consumers. The literal meaning of the term ‘outlaws’ is one breaking free from the confines of the traditional laws and, in turn, promoting a new way of life.

Companies associated with this category aim to achieve a similar objective- to stimulate a fresher mindset, shattering the glass ceiling and enticing reformation.

Diesel, a globally renowned brand has gained a rebellious reputation, owing to consistent efforts to defy societal norms. At the foremost of this lies the “Be Stupid” campaign. In a society valuing rationality, this campaign communicates the exact opposite. Associating “stupidity” with courage and risk-taking reels consumers who identify with such ideologies.

Consumer groups craving social liberation tend to formulate a target audience for diesel.

The Magicians, brands catering to the “dreamers” of the world, are understood to promote an idea of imagination and unbounded belief. Such companies are visionaries, in a way of promoting groundbreaking innovations. Consumers fascinated by the idea of revelations or identifying as utopians formulate a large subset of the audience.

Gucci is a brand that effectively reflects the magician mentality. Through the mystique and secrecy created owing to the ad campaigns, Gucci communicates a larger-than-life image for its audience.

The Heros, embarking upon a journey of motivation, maximising potential and overcoming adversity create an identity of resilience. A brand looking to attract customers embodying perseverance tends to adopt “The Hero” archetype.

The infamous slogan “Just Do It” by Nike is a prime representation of a brand identity that resonates with the hero narrative. “Greatness, It only takes everything”, “Winning isn’t for everyone” and similar phrases plastered across billboards globally, portray the identity of the hero. The colours black and white, like those of the logo, along with grey, red, gold and blue, subliminally build consumer perception as a brand supporting achievement, greatness and growth.

Building a brand with the intent of developing connections provides 3 archetypes- The Lover, The Jester and The Everyman.

The Lover archetype, encompassing romanticism, affection and charm, exudes elegance and tasteful quality. Consumers chase emotional connection, congeniality, and gentleness, which align with the lover archetype.

Chanel, the quintessential lover brand, globally renowned for its pleasant, idyllic and feminine products has gained an edge in the fashion and beauty industry. Its mission statement “To be the ultimate house of luxury, defining style and creating desire, now and forever” creates this identity.

Moreover, the hues of red and pink have been deemed as the “lover colours”, with brands like Victoria’s Secret adopting this through the logo, pretty pink packaging and statement pink pajama sets.

The Jester

Unconventional, revolutionary and extraordinary– the mission of each brand falling under the Jester Archetype is to communicate in a manner never done before. The informality and frivolous nature eliminate animosity, developing a level of comfort and compassion. Adopting bright fierce colours of orange, pink and yellow, the jesters of the industry undertake the humorous approach, catering to a larger, facetious group of the market.

For instance, the debut Avavav show at Milan Fashion Week had models intentionally tripping on the runways. This charade was to mock the rigidity of elite fashion displays. Albeit not an entire identity, this stunt is considered under The Jester Archetype owing to its amusing approach.

The Everyman

Familiar, acceptable and welcoming, The Everyman possesses the perfect blend of relatability. The everyman is quite literally, for everyman. Brands falling under this ambit promote practicality and are trend followers.

H&M, the standard Everyperson brand aligns with 2 primary needs of a consumer- connection and belongingness. The products, campaigns, and social media marketing of H&M do exactly this by providing a bridge to fit in the society. The Fast Fashion model further reiterates that the brand undergoes changes and evolution as and when society progresses.

Aerie, by American Eagle, is yet another example. By infusing the colour ‘blue’ in the logo and campaigns, the company seeks to unite its target audience.

Similar to denim blue, the colours teal, ocher, peach and sky blue sought to attract an audience craving social belongingness, trend followers and inclusivity.

Companies aiming to build a structure within the highly dynamic fashion industry consist of three archetypes- The creator, The Ruler and The Caregiver.

The Creator companies focus on innovation, extraordinary thinking and transforming a vision into reality, such companies are trendsetters. They seek inspiration from consumers yearning for change, progress and setting new standards. The emphasis on personality, individuality and customisation is key for a company to be considered theCreator.

Burberry embodies The Creator chronicle in multiple aspects. Starting from the slogan of “At Burberry, we believe creativity opens spaces” to the emphasis on creative craftsmanship, the irrevocable plaid pattern alongside the complex logo portrays a commitment towards innovation.

The colour scheme for this archetype is artistic- signifying freedom and light, through colours like blood orange, pink and mauve.

The Ruler archetype is often termed as the leader of the industry. Encouraging elegance, confidence and an assertive audience, the ruler seeks to empower and enrich its customers.

Louis Vuitton, the pioneer of the fashion industry has been the ruler of many trends. Starting from the “unpickable lock” in 1886 to the timeless “LV” mammogram products, this brand is a testament to the Ruler narrative. With its distinguished collections of bags, shoes and suits, LV has paved the way for black tie to be luxurious and exquisite.

Similarly, Cartier is considered a titan of the rulers, underscoring strong craftsmanship and bold, classic pieces exuding power and prestige.

The Caregiver archetype indicates reassurance, care and consideration. Companies adopting the caregiver mindset strive towards creating comfort and familial relations amongst their consumer base.

TOMS is a prime example of a caregiver brand. From the gentle blue logo to the “wear good” business model, TOMS always takes it a notch above. The “one for one” donation campaign intends to donate a pair of shoes for each pair purchased. Such efforts for the betterment of the community personify the caregiver spirit.

Light undertones of blue, brown, green and salmon pink create an unspoken image of The Caregivers.

Brands delving deep into spirituality, branch into three varied subsets- The Innocent, The Sage and The Explorer.

The Innocent’s of the industry focus on purity, peace and simplicity. The primary objective is to unite a seemingly polarised society through an emphasis on nature/naturality. The branding is mainly centred around connection and sanctity.

TOMS, whilst embodying the spirit of the caregiver, also fits the criteria for The Innocent archetype. The altruistic character of the company, along with the muted hues of blue create the image of simplicity and harmony. Running parallel to this is the “Calm App” which adopts a similar colour scheme to convey a “love thy neighbour” image.

Not only blue, but also pastel and muted tones of green, pink and warm tans create The Innocent Narrative.

The Sage archetype caters to an inquisitive and curious audience-the learners. The key emphasis of brands under this archetype includes understanding, comprehension and growth. Such brands aim to provide information in a definitive manner.

Marketing campaigns promoting sustainability throughout the production cycle as well as individually fall under this archetype. The muted tones of navy, white and gray also fit the sage mentality.

The Explorer, underscoring discovery, exploration and uncovering the unknowns, cater to a largely individualistic and adventurous audience. Such brands seek to support the customers’ quests through products that are marketed as sturdy and essential, yet trendsetting. With a colour palette largely resonating with nature i.e., green, brown and neutral tones, The Explorers seek to push the limits and connect with those willing to do so.

The North Face is a popular explorer brand, with slogans such as “Never stop exploring”, to products meant to withstand tumultuous weather, this company promotes longevity and durability for all.

Even beyond established entities of the industry, up-and-coming businesses must understand and implement this psychology to effectively surpass overwhelming competition.

The primary module of inculcating Jungian psychology for a start-up is via colour.

Colours play an influential role in evoking emotions, seemingly effortlessly. The choice of colour palette for logos, packaging and products is extremely essential.

Certain successful instances include the trademarked Tiffany blue or striking red Louboutins.

Beyond the colour, the design of the logo is considered impactful. The complexity yet simplicity of the Rolex Logo makes it a successful contender for the Ruler Archetype. The logo must communicate an image and formulate an identity in and of itself to captivate customers.

The marketing campaigns are an equally essential component. This includes not only the advertisements through billboards but also the slogans and jingles adopted by the company. Christian Dior’s slogan “Sisterhood is forever” is consistent with the lover facet while the “the spirit of travel” campaign by LV reinforces the explorer mentality.

This indicates that the message communicated must be synonymous with the image sought to be created.

Hence, in an oversaturated market with merely discernible products, the key factor of attraction or Unique Selling Point is the personality.

The more deeply a consumer can resonate with a brand, the higher the likelihood of carving a niche in the market. Therefore, Jungian Psychology has paved the way for start-ups and international corporations alike to build a brand that is more human than ever. This opportunity must be capitalised upon to cultivate visibility and create a standing in the Fashion Industry.

Sources-

Using Jungian Archetypes to push the boundaries of marketing:

https://medium.com/nustory/using-jungian-archetypes-in-marketing-bf53ffce2736

The Archetypes of leading brands, 2022:

https://medium.com/@anastasia.butrym/part-3-what-are-the-characters-of-the-leading-brands-of-2022-be98cf2d7e98

Brand Archetypes, the definitive Guide:

https://iconicfox.com.au/brand-archetypes/

Brand Archetype series, The Ruler:

https://www.thedaringfempreneur.com/blog/brand-archetype-series-the-ruler#:~:text=Cartier%20embodies%20the%20Ruler%20archetype,designs%2C%20and%20heritage%20of%20elegance.

Brand Archetype Series, The Lover: https://www.thedaringfempreneur.com/blog/brand-archetype-series-the-lover

Brand Archetypes Series, The Outlaw: https://www.thedaringfempreneur.com/blog/brand-archetype-series-the-outlaw

Brand Archetype Series, The Hero: https://www.thedaringfempreneur.com/blog/brand-archetype-series-the-hero

Author(s):

The Nexus between Creativity and Copyright Infringement: A Practical Guide in Nutshells

Fashion Law Journal — Mon, 30 Dec 2024 09:18:42 +0000

In a world increasingly driven by digital innovation and rapid digital sharing of ideas, the relationship between creativity and copyright infringement has never been more significant.

Artists, writers, musicians, and creators constantly draw inspiration from existing works, walking a fine line between homage and plagiarism. This tension is amplified by the accessibility and replicability of contents, raising questions about intellectual property rights, artistic freedom, and the essence of creativity itself, especially in industries like fashion, music, art where creativity and replication have always coexisted.

This article explores the intricate dynamics at play in the debate over where creativity ends and copyright infringement begins, arguing that a nuanced understanding of inspiration, transformation, and authorship is essential in defining this border.

Copyright is a legal mechanism that grants creators exclusive rights over their original works of authorship, including literary, musical, artistic, and audiovisual works. Its primary objective is to incentivize creativity by granting economic rights to creatorswhile ensuring public access over time.

To qualify for copyright protection, a work must meet the standard of originality requiring, under several pieces of legislation worldwide, such as the US Copyright Act 1976, the work to have a minimal degree of creativity and independent creation.

This peculiar trait opens the door for questions about how much borrowing from an original work can occur without diminishing the originality of the new work, given that creativity is inherently a process of building upon existing ideas and influences.

From a legal perspective, this makes the concept of transformative use, which allows certain adaptations to add new expression, meaning, or message to the original work., pivotal as courts need to grapple with the parameter of “substantial similarity” to establish whether a work is transformative enough to be considered original or just a replica of another artist’s expression.

The resulting grey area not only complicates the creative process itself, but also highlights the urge to provide clear legal guidelines that protect original creators while encouraging the evolution of creative expressions.

On this note, the fair use doctrine provides a fundamental exception to copyright protections, allowing limited use of copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. In determining whether a use qualifies as fair, courts typically consider four factors: purpose and character of the use, to consider whether the new work is transformative—i.e., whether it adds new expression, meaning, or message to the original work; nature of the copyrighted work as creative works are entitled to more protection than factual works; amount and substantiality of the quantity of the original work used and the qualitative significance of what was borrowed; effect on the market, to examine whether the new work harms the market for the original work.

The interpretation of borrowing within copyright law has been shaped significantly by several landmark legal cases, each illustrating the evolving boundaries between permissible use and infringement. These cases not only clarify the legal parameters but also shed light on the dynamic interplay between innovation, creativity, and intellectual property rights.

One pivotal case is Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994), which addressed the question of whether parody constitutes fair use. In this instance, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the rap group 2 Live Crew, whose parody of Roy Orbison’s classic song “Oh, Pretty Woman” was challenged as a copyright infringement. The Court emphasized the transformative nature of parody, asserting that even recognizable borrowing from the original work could be permissible when the new work recontextualizes the material in a transformative manner. This decision underscored the principle that fair use is not merely about how much is borrowed but about how the borrowed material is repurposed.

In contrast, the Blurred Lines case (2015), which pitted the Marvin Gaye Estate against Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams, highlighted the complexities of musical borrowing. The jury found that Thicke and Williams had infringed upon Gaye’s song “Got to Give It Up,” citing substantial similarities between the two compositions. The ruling sparked widespread debate over how much influence a new work can draw from an existing one without crossing into infringement. Critics of the decision argued that it risked stifling creativity by setting a precedent that might deter artists from exploring stylistic or thematic inspiration.

A different dimension of borrowing emerged in Authors Guild v. Google, Inc. (2015), a case concerning Google’s ambitious book digitization project. The dispute centred on whether Google’s practice of digitizing books for its searchable online library constituted copyright infringement. The Second Circuit Court ultimately ruled in Google’s favour, recognizing the project as a transformative use. By offering users a new way to access and interact with literature, Google’s library was deemed to have created substantial public benefit without compromising the authors’ original works. This case illustrated how innovation, when approached thoughtfully, can coexist with copyright law to open avenues for new creative possibilities.

Together, these cases demonstrate the nuanced considerations at the heart of copyright disputes. From parody in music to transformative digitization projects, they highlight the need to balance protecting creators’ rights with fostering an environment conducive to creativity and innovation.

Yet there’s more.

The impact of digital technologies further complicates the overall picture.

The rise of digital technology has transformed the creative landscape, making it easier than ever to access, remodel and share content. Digital media platforms have democratised creativity, allowing individuals to express themselves and reach a wider audience. However, this ease of access also raises concerns about copyright infringement, as users often borrow from established works without proper attribution or permission. As a result, the digital age has forced a re-evaluation of copyright laws, highlighting the need for an up-to-date regulatory framework that accommodates new forms of artistic expression while protecting the rights of original creators.

The rise of AI-generated works will further amplify the ongoing struggle to balance innovation and intellectual property rights.

Indeed, copyright law generally requires human authorship to be eligible for copyright protection. Accordingly, works generated by purely mechanical processes or random selection cannot be copyrighted.

One pressing question is therefore how much human input is necessary for an AI-generated work to be copyrightable. This debate also touches on the assessment of originality, as determining the creative merit of machine-generated content poses unique challenges that current legal frameworks struggle to address.

Similarly, the issue of 3D printable files raises questions about the limits of copyright protection. Often considered utilitarian in nature, these files generally fall outside the scope of copyright. This categorisation underscores the difficulty of applying traditional intellectual property principles to emerging technologies that blur the lines between functionality and creativity.

As if the current situation was not intricate enough, global standards and diverse copyright regimes further emphasize the significance of the location and context of use, failing to ensure consistency in protecting creators’ rights. Different jurisdictions may afford indeed varying degrees of protection and leeway for creative borrowing.

However, a certain degree of flexibility is desirable.

Overly stringent copyright laws can stifle creativity and innovation by creating an environment of fear and hesitation among creators.

When the potential for litigation looms large, artists may self-censor or avoid exploring certain ideas altogether, leading to a homogenisation of creative production. This deterrent effect can stifle the development of art and culture by discouraging creators from engaging with existing works that could inspire new creations. A balanced approach to copyright that encourages collaboration, and the free exchange of ideas is crucial to fostering a vibrant creative ecosystem. By fostering an environment where artists feel empowered to innovate without the constant threat of infringement claims, society can cultivate a richer cultural landscape.

As society evolves, so must our understanding of creativity and copyright. Emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and blockchain are reshaping the creative landscape, presenting new challenges and opportunities for copyright enforcement and protection. AI-generated content raises questions about authorship and ownership, while blockchain technology offers potential solutions for tracking and securing creators’ rights. The future of creativity is likely to require a re-evaluation of existing legal frameworks to accommodate these advances, while fostering a culture of innovation. Proactive discussions about the implications of these technologies will be essential in defining the line between creativity and copyright infringement in the years to come.

Therefore, it seems imperative to foster a legal and cultural environment that supports creativity while respecting the rights of original creators. By embracing a nuanced understanding of the interplay between inspiration, transformation and authorship, society can cultivate a vibrant creative ecosystem that respects both innovation and intellectual property rights. As we continue to grapple with these issues, a balanced approach is essential to fostering the future of creativity in an ever-changing world.

References

Arnold, M. & S. Levin. (2021). The Difference Between Plagiarism and Copyright Infringement. [HTML]

Retrieved from https://copyrightalliance.org/differences –copyright –infringementplagiarism/

Bytescare. (2023). Difference Between Plagiarism and Copyright Infringement. [HTML] Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/difference –between –plagiarismcopyright –infringement –bytescare/ Das, S. (2023). Plagiarism vs Copyright Infringement – Rules and Differences. [HTML] Retrieved from https://legamart.com/articles/plagiarism –vs –copyright –infringement/

University of Illinois in Chicago. (2023b). Avoiding Plagiarism – Dissertation / Thesis FAQ re: Copyright.

[HTML] Retrieved from https://researchguides.uic.edu/c.php?g=252209& p=1682802

University of Illinois in Chicago. (2023c). Avoiding Plagiarism – Avoiding Plagiarism. [HTML] Retrieved from https://researchguides.uic.edu/etds/plagiarism

Arnold,2021

Bytescare. (2023)

Das(2023)

Gilden, A., & Subotnik, E. E. (2023). Copyright’s Capacity Gap. UC Davis L. Rev., 57, 899.

Wang, J. (2024). Reconstructing the copyright idea/expression dichotomy for video games. Queen

Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, 14(3), 248-266.

Gilson, L. L. (2024). Why be creative: A review of the practical outcomes associated with creativity at

the individual, group, and organizational levels. Handbook of organizational creativity, 303-322.

Henderson, P., Li, X., Jurafsky, D., Hashimoto, T., Lemley, M. A., & Liang, P. (2023). Foundation

models and fair use. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 24(400), 1-79.

Lua, E., Liu, D., & Shalley, C. E. (2024). Multilevel outcomes of creativity in organizations: An

integrative review and agenda for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 45(2), 209-233.

Ploman, E. W., & Hamilton, L. C. (2024). Copyright: Intellectual property in the information age.

Taylor & Francis.

Riccio, P., & Oliver, N. (2024). A techno-feminist perspective on the algorithmic censorship of artistic

nudity. Hertziana Studies in Art History, 3.

University of Illinois in Chicago. (2023c). Avoiding Plagiarism – Avoiding Plagiarism. [HTML]

Retrieved from https://researchguides.uic.edu/etds/plagiarism

West, M. A., & Sacramento, C. A. (2023). Creativity and innovation: The role of team and

organizational climate. In Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 317-337). Academic Press.

Nyembe, S. (2023). The Challenges of Protecting Copyright in the Digital Age Due to Digital

Piracy (Master’s thesis, University of Pretoria (South Africa)).

Das, K., Patel, J. D., Sharma, A., & Shukla, Y. (2023). Creativity in marketing: Examining the

intellectual structure using scientometric analysis and topic modeling. Journal of Business

Research, 154, 113384.

U.S. Copyright Act of 1976.
Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, 410 F.3d 792 (6th Cir. 2005).
Lessig, Lawrence. Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity. Penguin Press, 2004.
McLeod, Kembrew, and Peter Messere. “The Politics of Copyright Infringement.” Social Research, vol. 76, no. 1, 2009, pp. 225-248.
Samuelson, Pamela. “Mapping the Digital Public Domain: Threats and Opportunities.” Law and Contemporary Problems, vol. 66, no. 1, 2003, pp. 121-136.
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994).
Authors Guild v. Google Inc., 804 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2015).
Marvin Gaye Estate v. Robin Thicke, 898 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir. 2018).

Author Name: Nooshin Ardalan Manesh (LLM in Fashion Law – LUISS School of Law)

Noushin Ardalan Manesh, specializing on Fashion Law, fresh graduate from
Luiss Guido Carli International University.