Testimony of David Wolfe, Creative Director The ... - Public Knowledge

appropriates from all levels of the design world. Designer Mary Quant is credited with being the
inventor of the miniskirt, yet Quant denies being the inventor. She says she looked out her
window in Chelsea, saw what was happening on the streets, and picked up on what was in the
air. Copying in fashion design is about incorporating influences from all around, and it is not
just about creating a $200 knock-off of a $2,000 dress.
Copying and appropriation creates trends that are beneficial to designers, retailers and
consumers. A designer who introduces or reintroduces an idea benefits by inducing more
consumers to buy as the trend spreads. The designers who copy, appropriate and reinterpret
benefit because they can take an idea, make it their own and create competition in the fashion
marketplace. Consumers benefit because they have more choices. A consumer may not like an
original design, but may be inclined to purchase a reinterpretation. Fashion thrives when trends
can spread from haute couture to sales racks and everything in between because consumers have
more choices. Consumers with more choices are more likely to find clothing that fits their tastes
or price range, and designers and retailers are more likely to profit.
H.R. 5055 Would Be Detrimental to the Fashion Industry, Retailers and Consumers
H.R. 5055 would provide fashion designers a three year monopoly over a fashion design
and any design “substantially similar” to it. Copyright protection for fashion designs would harm
the thriving fashion industry, retailers and consumers. Specifically, I urge you to oppose H.R.
5055 for the following reasons:
• Copyright protection would cause delays because it would create litigation,
injunctions and licensing. Delays would stunt the development of trends, and
ultimately the fashion industry, as disputes would outlast the attention span of the
fashion market.
• Determining originality in fashion design is virtually impossible, and thus it
would be virtually impossible for judges to effectively and fairly enforce the law.
• The legislation would ultimately decrease the amount of choices available to
consumers, and would dramatically increase costs for the fashion industry and
retailers.
Delays from litigation, injunctions and licensing would stunt the fashion industry
Copyright protection would slow the rapid pace of the fashion industry, which is what
makes it profitable. As a result the industry for the first time would be subject to the risk of
infringement litigation. Fashion designers would be held up with the time and expense of
depositions, injunctions, trials and the negotiations. H.R. 5055 would create a morass of
litigation that will hinder rather than encourage creativity in fashion design. Rather than
efficiently creating new fashion designs for the market, designers will be trapped in the perpetual
chaos of trying to defend the copyright on existing designs while planning and producing designs
for the future. The lifespan of a legal dispute is longer than the attention span of the fashion
3