How to foil the fashion fakes

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

How to foil the fashion fakes

Fashion designs are not easy to protect in the US. Trademark, trade dress, design patent and copyright law are all useful, but each has its disadvantages. This was the message to hundreds of people that attended yesterday’s industry breakout session on the fashion industry.

To qualify for protection as trade dress, a design must show acquired distinctiveness and non-functionality (either utilitarian or aesthetic). This is possible. In Miche Bag v. Marshall (2010) the handbag producer successfully won protection for removal shells that went over the bag. They were considered non-functional when combined with the other elements of the bag’s design. But clothing and particularly dresses rarely pass this test.


Design patents are “probably the most fruitful area of protection in fashion,” said speaker Louis S. Ederer of Arnold & Porter. Fellow speaker Barbara Kolsun of shoe brand Stuart Weitzman described how she files several design patents every year. The problem is they are expensive ($6,000 to $8,000), time limited and take 12 to 18 months to be registered. So Stuart Weitzman only files design patents for shoe models it thinks will still be big sellers two years from now, beyond the normal fashion cycles.


“When you do get protection it’s great,” said Kolsun. “I call it a ‘bingo’—you normally write your cease and desist letter and get your money in pretty short order.”


Copyright is difficult to get for fashion items unless you can show the design is separable from its functional role. While Kolsun gave examples of two belt buckles that succeeded in getting copyright protection, few other items of clothing have been successful.


There was great optimism at the end of last year when the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill to extend copyright to the fashion industry. But for the fourth time in five years (similar bills were introduced in 2006, 2007 and 2009) it has got stuck in committee. “The problem is that there is a split within the fashion industry and even within brands themselves about the benefits of being able to copy designs,” said speaker Anne Gilson LaLonde of Gilson on Trademarks. “Many of the big brands have bridge or diffusion lines and they genuinely don’t know if a law like this would hurt that side of the business.”

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A $110 million US verdict against Apple and an appellate order staying a $39 million trademark infringement finding against Amazon were also among the top talking points
Attorneys are watching how AI affects trademark registrations and whether a SCOTUS ruling from last year will have broader free speech implications
Patent lawyers explain why they will be keeping an eye on the implications of a pharma case and on changes at the USPTO in the second half of 2025
The insensitive reaction to a UK politician crying on TV proves we have a long way to go before we can say we are tackling workplace wellbeing
Adrian Percer says he was impressed by the firm’s work on billion-dollar cases as well as its culture
In our latest interview with women IP leaders, Catherine Bonner at Murgitroyd discusses technology, training, and teaching
Developments included an update in the VAR dispute between Ballinno and UEFA, the latest CMS updates, and a swathe of market moves
The LMG Life Sciences Americas Awards is thrilled to present the 2025 shortlist
A new order has brought the total security awarded to a Canadian tech company to $45 million, the highest-ever by an Indian court in an IP case
Andrew Blattman reflects on how IP practices have changed and shares his hopes for increased AI use and better performance on the stock market
Gift this article