WTF

[Shucks]

I think you need to do some homework on:

- Chinese IP legislation
- the economics of organized crime and counterfeiting.
- the differences in production set-up between counterfeiting operations and serious business, for instance in conditions of workers.

If you care enough, WIPO reports are a good place to start...

Anyway, I feel we need to get back to the thread topic, no?

[Lane]

From an ethical standpoint, it's complete bullshit. Period. That's my take on it. It's stealing someone else's intellectual property for profit off of someone else's hard work and original ideas.

On a deeper level, will customers who buy the cheap theft versions grow up to buy the authentic versions? I don't think so. I think if you grow up looking for cheap alternatives to original concepts and work, you're suckling from the teet of convenience and the average person likely won't get weened.

I think you should watch the video from TED about the democratization of fashion. I think its a good thing that there are cheaper alternatives of a lesser quality/primitive version of the real designer piece. It allows for each demographic to get what it desires, and to allow people to obtain the real/superior item if they choose to. Or settle with inferior versions which they might enjoy.This also spurs innovation and growth in the industry. It allows it to be maximized at its full potential versus being kept at a stagnant pace. These copies are nothing compared to the amazing things churned out from these designers. It forces designers to be creative more and more, and explore themselves and channel that energy into the construction of even better garments.

[beardown]

I think you should watch the video from TED about the democratization of fashion. I think its a good thing that there are cheaper alternatives of a lesser quality/primitive version of the real designer piece. It allows for each demographic to get what it desires, and to allow people to obtain the real/superior item if they choose to. Or settle with inferior versions which they might enjoy.This also spurs innovation and growth in the industry. It allows it to be maximized at its full potential versus being kept at a stagnant pace. These copies are nothing compared to the amazing things churned out from these designers. It forces designers to be creative more and more, and explore themselves and channel that energy into the construction of even better garments.

Pardon my french, but I'm still calling bullshit it on it overall.
"Copy-cat theft spurs creativity. It's a positive thing!"

Sorry but nobody is going to sell me on this idea. To me, it reeks of justification in a situation that very few people want to address, let alone actually open up Pandora's box of what fighting it would entail.

Here's the most simple, quickest answer to that:

The best artists and designers work in their own natural style, mostly developed over a long, long period of development personally. As I've mentioned about Rick before (go into the Rick Owens thread), what Rick creates feels like an extension of himself to me. And I also mention that's what makes him such an effective designer. That type of symmetry that exists between the artist and his work is, to me, what makes it effective as a design and puts him on the level he has achieved.

When designers are forcibly pushed into different directions to stay on top of theft (because that's what it is, after all) then they get pushed into directions they wouldn't normally explore and that's not what art or design should be about. As an artist, you should never have to change up your natural instincts in creation because you're being chased and you're trying to outrun the bad guys.

Sorry. I have absolutely no patience for style thieves when it comes to art, design and creativity. It's one thing to be inspired by an artist (say, Boris to Rick) but it's crossing the line when people knock it off seam by seam and cut by cut.
It's very common unfortunately and that's why I think you see so many people trying to scramble to justify it or spin it as, 'Oh, it's a positive thing! It spurs on the real creative people to go deeper!"

That's my two cents. I don't particularly care if people disagree because I've dealt with this not only on a personal and artistic level but also on a legal level.
It happens in all aspects of creation (literature, music, fashion design, art, etc) because as a society overall, we've boiled down art and design and creativity to the lowest common denominator: It's all about money now. And if something is appealing and it's done on a small level, then nobody is going to complain when it's adopted and stolen and presented on a much larger, cheaper level for mass consumption.

That's all: This kind of thing represents the Lowest Common Denominator..a group that suddenly 'relates' to it and feeds off of it until it's consumed and discarded as quickly as possible and I have very little patience for that aspect of society.

[Lane]

Well, i disagree but I respect your perspective as an artist. Someone who obviously sympathizes with the arduous process of creation.

My take is obviously influenced by economic reasoning, but at the same time I see this in other arenas. Like when games/software becomes open source there is a beautiful explosion in modifications, and new tools which are readily accessible to everyone using the original product.

Plus, I'd not want to go off topic since this is a fashion forum. However, if you hate corporations/people making money off others than you won't want to be on the side of IP laws. Research Monsanto, and the history of patent laws and the abuses/injustices that have occured for the acquisition of patents.

[Shucks]

Well, i disagree but I respect your perspective as an artist. Someone who obviously sympathizes with the arduous process of creation.

My take is obviously influenced by economic reasoning, but at the same time I see this in other arenas. Like when games/software becomes open source there is a beautiful explosion in modifications, and new tools which are readily accessible to everyone using the original product.

Plus, I'd not want to go off topic since this is a fashion forum. However, if you hate corporations/people making money off others than you won't want to be on the side of IP laws. Research Monsanto, and the history of patent laws and the abuses/injustices that have occured for the acquisition of patents.

i've mentioned this last time that this whole copying discussion came up, but do we really want to have a society which encourages mass-market copying and throw-away products?

and without going into any deeper discussion of IP legislation (which i'd gladly do in the right thread), i think merz summed up beautifully how i feel about the whole phenomenon of copying of design and the people who support it through their purchasing behavior:

witness the soul-crushing cycle of consumers & design bottom-feeders.

[Faust]

As the person who brought the 'p-word' up in the thread, I should clarify: the word privilege doesn't have an inherent value statement tied to it. And this was my thinking when I threw the word into the forum. It was meant to be stated as a descriptive fact and not a measure of access to disposable money for discretionary purchases. It's a pretty broad concept whose meaning only becomes clear as we examine the context in which the word is used. I used that particular word, "privilege," not so that I could throw an epithet at *any SZer* but because I think that so long as we spend hours talking about zippers and this season or that, we owe it to ourselves to stand back and think critically and productively about, um, I can't avoid it guys, our relationship with capitalism, consumption, etc. <----and no, none of these have to be necessarily thought of as "bad words" and for you who are feeling defensive, you aren't being judged.

In fact, I think you are all great -- so creative with how you wear things, have great eyes (uh, meaning you have a talent for telling what clothing best conveys something about a/our current collective ethos), and even in how you use these forums.

I have no interest in who has the most expensive jacket. I joined SZ because here I can be the aesthete that I am amongst, the most discerning of aesthetes. There is the possibility for mutual learning there, no? In other words, we can talk about privilege without using "the privileged", as Mr. Bear inaccurately suggests I do, as a way to suggest -- nay, accuse you all -- of being part of the "wealthy elite, squad." That is a ridiculous cause to take up.

I am here because you all inspire me. I like all the photos of what people have found. I love seeing how creative people can be in the way that they incorporate their clothing into their wardrobes.

So, going forward, I propose that we should feel that we can discuss privilege in thoughful, meaningful ways, and certainly not assume that the discussion is being had so that we can create a taxonomy of the SZ user, into which we can slot him/her based on that person's access to money, or whether or not that person wears "authentic" pieces. That would be an utterly meaningless project.

And Sir Bear-a-lot, I appreciate your generosity in promising not to be too harsh to the fresh(wo)man. (And that means I don't have to remove my Rika glasses and step outside either, right? Dope.)

xoxo, MBT

That was a sweet and thoughtful post I am glad you did not get offended - beardown is really as sweet and cuddly as a bear.

[Faust]

I think you need to do some homework on:

- Chinese IP legislation
- the economics of organized crime and counterfeiting.
- the differences in production set-up between counterfeiting operations and serious business, for instance in conditions of workers.

If you care enough, WIPO reports are a good place to start...

Anyway, I feel we need to get back to the thread topic, no?

Inarritu's new film, Biutiful, is a good place to continue.

[Faust]

Well, i disagree but I respect your perspective as an artist. Someone who obviously sympathizes with the arduous process of creation.

My take is obviously influenced by economic reasoning, but at the same time I see this in other arenas. Like when games/software becomes open source there is a beautiful explosion in modifications, and new tools which are readily accessible to everyone using the original product.

Plus, I'd not want to go off topic since this is a fashion forum. However, if you hate corporations/people making money off others than you won't want to be on the side of IP laws. Research Monsanto, and the history of patent laws and the abuses/injustices that have occured for the acquisition of patents.

Hear, hear!

[MetroBulotDodo]

That was a sweet and thoughtful post I am glad you did not get offended - beardown is really as sweet and cuddly as a bear.

Awww. And really perfect that Sir Bear-a-lot (thusly titled for his chivalry)-- who wrongly thought I was calling out SZers for being rich brats -- is the principal subject in a note that will allow me to start posting photos of the brilliant and artisanal pieces I am lucky enough to have acquired through *my* hard work.

Here I come WAYWT!! FUUUUUUN.

[huckleberry]

When it comes to selling fakes of Lacoste or D&G at flea markets then I would tend to agree the individuals are probably interlinked with other crime, but that is due to their lifestyle etc.
However I don't think the companies making Rick Owens or Julius fakes are of the same crowd as they do not appeal to a mass market and rely heavily on the internet for their sales. Their products require some level of skill to manifcature, even though they are far inferior to the real product.

[beardown]

That was a sweet and thoughtful post I am glad you did not get offended - beardown is really as sweet and cuddly as a bear.

Thanks, Faust. I get worked up and passionate about certain things but I don't want anyone to feel intimidated to respond or discuss.
Off topic but still slightly relevant, my member name is the result of the following real-life situation:

I was in a small pub talking to a girl who's ex-boyfriend was staring at us the whole night. I'm in a small town and everyone pretty much knows everybody else so when I left (I was with 3 other people) there was a note on the windshield of my friend's car.
I plucked it off and read it out loud, drunkenly:

"Tell that guy if I catch him talking to you again, he's in for the beardown of his life."

Everyone laughed and for the rest of the night I was 'beardown.'

It was supposed to be 'beat down' but since it was written as one word on a napkin...well, you get the point.

[Faust]

/\ hahaha, that's pretty funny. :-)

[Shucks]

Inarritu's new film, Biutiful, is a good place to continue.

Ah cool. Missed this one...

[Lane]

i've mentioned this last time that this whole copying discussion came up, but do we really want to have a society which encourages mass-market copying and throw-away products?

and without going into any deeper discussion of IP legislation (which i'd gladly do in the right thread), i think merz summed up beautifully how i feel about the whole phenomenon of copying of design and the people who support it through their purchasing behavior:

That's actually why I am here as I'm against it. My only problem is I can't reconcile my opinions which on one hand favors the democratization of fashion; since I see it as an overall benefit to society by allowing there to be less of a hierarchy in place. On the other hand I have a detestment for consumerism and standardization, though. I love artistry, but also see my first point as a necessary evil?

You could in fact even argue that this allows for developing countries to develop faster because many of these knockoffs are produced in developing countries. It almost allows for global economic advancement. Yes, there are some downsides to these practices, though (multi-national corporations). So hard to stay on topic, lol.

Perfect picture, lol, didn't even have to argue anything.

[destay]

When it comes to selling fakes of Lacoste or D&G at flea markets then I would tend to agree the individuals are probably interlinked with other crime, but that is due to their lifestyle etc.
However I don't think the companies making Rick Owens or Julius fakes are of the same crowd as they do not appeal to a mass market and rely heavily on the internet for their sales. Their products require some level of skill to manifcature, even though they are far inferior to the real product.

hey, soles of the fake ro dunks are almost god-tier in front of the real ones