I spotkanie inspirujące moda & prawo

Czy pokazy mody są artystycznym performancem? Jakie są wyznaczniki i współczesne trendy mody? Czy minimalizm, surrealizm, futuryzm, można odnaleźć na wybiegu? Co inspiruje projektantów? Kiedy sukienka staje się dziełem sztuki? Jak moda konfrontuje się z prawem?

Na pierwszym spotkaniu Akademii Soft Skills dla Prawników oraz Fashion Law Business porozmawiamy jak świat mody, prawa i sztuki wzajemnie się przenikają. Projektanci wtajemniczą nas w świat swoich projektów, opowiedzą o inspiracjach i pasji, ale także swojej artystycznej wizji mody. Postaramy się skonfrontować modę z innymi dziedzinami sztuki: rzeźbą, malarstwem, architekturą skupiając się na jej walorach artystycznych.  Moda nie musi być tylko glamour. Jak się ubrać, a nie przebrać, jak mądrze korzystać ze wzorców oraz jaka jest różnica między modą a stylem? I gdzie w modzie znajdujemy prawo?

Jednym z Prelegentów podczas naszego spotkania 28 lutego będzie Aga Prus, która jest wnuczką Brunona Kamińskiego, słynnego warszawskiego szewca.  Buty pod marką "Aga Prus handmade shoes" są szyte ręcznie w rodzinnej pracowni przy Nowym Świecie w Warszawie. Powstają w krótkich seriach zgodnie z regułami tradycyjnego rzemiosła. Każda para butów jej projektu szyta jest z dbałością o najmniejszy szczegół, wyłącznie z naturalnych skór. 

fot. H. Karapuda / www.agaprus.pl

Instagram's New Terms. Simply?

"Facebook bought Instagram in April for $1B, and we are seeing bits of the aftermath this week in the form of Instagram's disintegration from Twitter and the photo-taking and sharing site's new "Terms of Use." The updated version of the terms agreement, which will take effect January 16, is not that different from agreements on other sites. However, because the Internet is the source of constant chaos, the debut of Instagram's terms is causing quite a bit of buzz, and to some extent, it is warranted.  

Source: Google

Source: Google

People have the right to be upset as this is yet another example of a non-user friendly agreement. The terms are designed to be difficult for the average user to interpret and to be subsequently ignored. The new terms should not be a source of chaos, but at the same time, those who are making light of them are likely the same people who have little understanding of the law and the same people who post those hoax messages on their Facebook pages. So, read a few of my straight-forward clarifications and some of the controversial excerpts below 

Counterfeiting? No, Thanks

Trademarks are the most valuable commodities in the fashion industry. Fashion companies rely on their trademarks so consumers can identify a particular brand's products easily, which in turn has a bearing upon whether the consumer elects to purchase the product. Since copyright protection for fashion designs is limited, fashion companies must rely on their trademarks in order to help distinguish their products from those of their imitators.

Trademarks have the ability to stimulate consumer demand for products globally. This is particularly true given the advent of the Internet. Marks indicate that a particular product is associated with a certain reputation, and that, by buying another product with the same mark, consumers are purchasing item of the trademark owner's standard of quality. With the increased demand for certain trademarks, counterfeiters have realized the benefit of copying such IP. Counterfeit products can be created at a relatively low price and can be sold for great profits. 

What is trademark counterfeiting?

Trademark counterfeiting is the act of manufacturing or distributing a product or service bearing a mark that is identical to or substantially indistinguishable from a registered trademark. Simply put, trademark counterfeiting is theft of someone's IP. People who copy legitimate products not only reproduce the trademark owner's original patterns and designs, but they also decrease the value of the original products in the marketplace by making exclusive products seem as though they are available at mass-market prices. This practice harms the trademark owner, who seeks to maintain the exclusivity of the brand in the marketplace, while at the same time it allows counterfeiters to capitalize off the established goodwill and reputation of the trademark owner.

The Elements of Fashion Law

In practice, fashion law involves the application of principles from a number of legal disciplines - in particular, protection of IP, including anti counterfeiting and licensing; commercial operations, including the legal structure of a fashion business, commercial agreements, relevant employment law, marketing and advertising, and retail leasing; and international issues.

At the heart of both fashion law and entertainment law is IP law. However, fashion-related IP calls into play a number of specific principles not encountered in the entertainment context. While copyright issues are prevalent in the entertainment context, trademark issues are characteristics of the fashion industry.

IP is fundamental to the strategies of most large fashion companies. Fashion companies are able to charge a premium for their products to the extent that they have created brand value. Thus, an ordinary T-shirt sold as  a commodity (i.e., unbranded) would not fetch more than 10$ in today's marketplace, regardless of its quality. However, a T-shirt by Valentino may sell for $750. Brand value - another way of saying IP - is extremely expensive and difficult to acquire. Once fashion companies have brand value, they wish to keep and control it, and that is the job of their legal counsel. Most general counsels at major fashion companies began their legal careers as IP specialists.

Order in the Court!

In the last year major fashion houses have gone to court over copyright infringement, unethical work environments, and piracy issues.  Check out our gallery featuring 15 of fashion's biggest lawsuits — we promise you you'll never consider buying a fake Fendi ever again!

An Ad for Kate Spade: Who Owned the Photo?

W 2003 roku Kate Spade Company poprosiło o możliwość przejrzenia portfolio fotografa mody Billa Diodato. Znajdowało się w nim zrobione z poziomu podłogi zdjęcie dolnej połowy kabiny w publicznej ubikacji, gdzie pod drzwiami widoczne były obute w kolorowe sandały stopy kobiety, zwrócone do siebie. Na kafelkowej posadzce, obok lewej stopy kobiety, znajdowała się torebka. Kate Spade Company nie zatrudniło Diodato i zwróciło mu portfolio. Kilka miesięcy później firma wydała reklamę opartą na zdjęciu Jessiki Craig-Martin. Zdjęcie przedstawiało widok z podłogi w kabinie publicznej ubikacji, a widać na nim było dolną połowę kobiecych nóg, z obróconymi do siebie stopami, obutymi w kolorowe sandały. Na kafelkowej posadzce, obok lewej nogi kobiety, znajdowała się torebka. Diodato niedługo później pozwał Kate Spade za naruszenie praw autorskich.

In 2003, the Kate Spade Company requested to review the portfolio of fashion photograper Bill Diodato. This porftolio included a photograph showing a floor-eye view of the bottom half of a bathroom stall, with a woman's feet visible beneath the stall door, turned inward and shod in colorful strappy shoes. Sitting on the tile floor next to the woman's left foot was a handbag. The Kate Spade Company did not hire Diodato and returned his portfolio. Several months later the Kate Spade Company ran an advertisement, photographed by Jessica Craig-Martin, showing a floor-eye view of the inside of a bathfroom stall, with the lower half of a woman's legs visible, feet turned inward and shod in colorful strappy shoes. Sitting on the tile floor nest to the woman's left foot was a handbag. Thereafter, Diodato sued the Kate Spade Company for copyrights infringement. 

Source: Kate Spade

Advertising

Każdemu reklamodawcy można by zadać fundamentalne pytanie o definicję reklamy. Pokutuje błędne przekonanie, że reklama jest jedynie tym, co konsumenci widzą w telewizji i słyszą w radiu podczas przerw w programie, czytają w gazetach i czasopismach pomiędzy artykułami, czy też widują obok właściwej treści stron internetowych. Sądy i Federalna Komisja Handlu (FTC) posługują się jednak szerszą definicją reklamy, w myśl której reklamą są wszelkie komunikaty reklamodawcy skierowane do publiki w celu autopromocji lub promocji jego produktów i usług.

A threshold question for any advertiser is, what is the definition of an advertisement? A common misconception is that advertising is limited to what consumers see on television or hear on the radio between program segments, or read in a newspaper or magazine interspersed with the articles, or see on a Website alongside the content. Courts and the FTC follow a more expansive definition of advertising, however, and seemingly consider any communication by an advertiser to the public to promote the advertiser and/or its products or services to constitute advertising.

W świecie mody definicja ta odnosi się do kampanii PR, product placementu, sponsorowania imprez, promocji (zarówno w sprzedaży hurtowej, jak i detalicznej), katalogów, wystaw produktów, opakowań, materiałów POS, a nawet wypowiedzi pracowników sprzedaży. Jeśli jakiegokolwiek typu reklama narusza prawo, trzeba się liczyć z tym, że przyjrzą się jej konkurenci reklamodawcy lub organy nadzorcze na poziomie federalnym, stanowym lub lokalnym.

In the fashion world, this definition of advertising means that public relations campaigns, product placements, event sponsorships, trade promotions (at the wholesale and retail levels), catalogs, product displays, packaging, point of sale matrials, and even oral communications by sales staff, for example, all constitute advertising and thus must be legally compliant or risk scrutiny and challenge by the fashion advertiser's competitiors or by the regulators at the federal, state, and/or local levels.

Source: Alexi Lubomirski