Fashion Law
The "Destruction of Affordable Fashion Bill" or IDPPPA gets one step closer to becoming Fashion Law
Consumers beware. The cost of clothing is about to rise. Reasonably priced fashionable items will be non-existent and affordable clothing will be utilitarian and boring. Why?
The Innovative Design Protection and Piracy Prevention Act ("IDPPPA") was unanimously approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday and now moves into the Senate for a full vote.
Deceptively called the "fake fashion bill" by its supporters, this bill has nothing to do with Counterfeit goods or Knock-off goods, which are covered under trademark law and are illegal.

This bill, more appropriately called the Destruction of Affordable Fashion Bill, seeks to amend copyright law and will:
- put numerous small businesses that don't have $400,000 to spend on litigation out of business;
- cause 1.6 jobs to be lost in Los Angeles for every fashion job lost;
- severely disrupt the fashion manufacturing process;
- cause lenders to stop lending;
- increase expediently the work load of the federal judiciary -- the court that rules on copyright litigation;
- narrow your choice of clothes; and
- increase the cost of the few items you can buy by at least 30%.
Pretty scary right?
And legally, the Destruction of Affordable Fashion Bill will wreck havoc in the courts, tying up dockets (and your inventory) for years because:
- it violates due process because designers are not required to file a copyright registration on their alleged "original design;" and
- its has new, uninterpreted terms - like "substantially identical," "deliberate copies" and "independent creation."
just to name a few problems.
And, yes, the trial lawyers i.e. the plaintiff's bar that work on contingency fees, support this bill. Why wouldn't they? There is no loser pays provision in the Destruction of Affordable Fashion Bill, so if a plaintiff files suit on a design they feel is original and they lose, they never have to deal with the economic consequences.
So let's all give a big round of applause to the CFDA and Senators Charles Schumer, Orrin Hatch and our own Dianne Feinstein.
When unemployment rises, your business collapses and the economy gets more depressed then it already is, you'll know where to send your thank you notes.
Related Fashion Law Blog Posts:
Why IDPPPA is going to KO the Business of Fashion
IDPPPA: How to SLAPP the Sting Out of Frivolous Litigation
IDPPPA will not prevent frivolous litigation
BREAKING NEWS: New Design Piracy Bill Introduced into Senate
http://fashionlaw.foxrothschild.com/admin/trackback/231672
What politicians benefit from this?
Staci,
Relax. There are still many designers with innovative ideas out there willing to work for and develop small companies. Granted, those who are incapable of an original thought may have a rough time of it. It will, however, make an opening for the rest of us. Not such a bad outcome, all in all.
That's an interesting question. Since the bill does not require designers to file copyright registrations for their designs, the bill is revenue neutral. Fashion Industry lure has it that Barry Diller, Diane Von Furstenberg's husband, donated substantial sums of money to the democratic party and Sen. Schumer, is demanding passage of this bill as "payback." As you may be aware, Diane is the President of the CFDA - the bills chief proponent.
Wow...what are H&M and Forever 21 going to do now? Or Wal-Mart for that matter?!
"Yay Democracy" =/
So, let me make sure I understand this...the Bill does not require designers to file copyright registration for their designs, but if they feel their design(s) have been knocked off, then they may pursue legal action against the alleged "copycat?" SR -- YES
Most innovation comes from "new designers" that established designers "copy" Who decides who's doing the copying? Whomever sues first or the company with the most money? SR - The Plaintiff intiates a lawsuit so they will have to allege that the orginated the design and the defendant copies them.
Will this mean that small companies need to distribute fashion in foreign markets in order to avoid this law if it passes in the US Senate? SR - That won't help if product is designed in the US
How was the French company that sued Ralph Lauren for a copied design legally able to sue and win against an American company? (Is there a difference in the law? Perhaps French designers file copyright registrations.)
SR - European law is different. it requires registration and the loser must pay all fees.
Please explain. Thanks.
SR-Hope that helps?