did Chanel and Anna Sui totally rip off vintage?

Same bag in black and white. If you go to Anna Sui's website, you can watch the fashion show. Ang, your bag is being carried by the third model.

 

That is disgusting. I've often admired Anna Sui's vintage inspired designs, but to copy a bag like that, and then to reproduce it in different colours, is lazy designing in the extreme.

I agree this needs some media attention!

 

I've emailed the girls at Fashionista.com and I will definitely submit this to the Websnob and IFB, I can also pitch it to Glam.com

Ang, I'm going to link to your blog as well.

Sandra

 

Guess I better crack down on getting the website revised, I've been slowly working at adding my new logo and look page by page but I'm only 1/4 of the way there!

Ang

 

Gads, that's just bad. I bet she figured no one would know.

 

Sad to say this happens all the time. many deisgners, and I use the term very loosely, don't design anything. I mean anything. It's all copied or designed by assistants.

many don't even sketch at all.

Hollis

 

The copy cat has been going on for ages! When I lived in LA, TOP designers would send me out to find things to be coppied.... I would come back wth a great vintage gown or purse and the next day it would be on the shelves! Everyone in the industry has and does it !

 

When I did vintage shows, the major RTW houses sent buyers to haul in the best pieces for 'inspiration'....expecting MAJOR discounts as well....

 

Wow. This is quite an eye opener, huh?

I guess I'm pretty naive because I had no idea that designers had people running around looking for "inspiration". It'll be interesting to find out what the Anna Sui rep has to say about Sandra's question regarding mass production.

As aggravating as this is...still...I can't help but think it's a good thing for vintage sellers. No? I could be completely off on that though. I was just thinking that 30's beaded bags could end up selling even better than normal from something like this. Hey...if I'm off base just slap me about the head.

 

Hasn't every "era" been coppied? This should not be a suprise to us! 60's copied the 20's, 70's copied the 30's and 80's copied the 40's. But dirrect coppies, well, that's another story!
ps, it wasn't inpiration, it was COPY!! "Go get a dress from the Vintage store, cut it open and make a patern!"

 

As yucky as this is, I have to agree that it's the way it works - I used to work for a fashion designer and we had a nice big room full of goodies we copied. Of course, we at least made them in different fabrics, and altered small details.

Now that I have a vintage clothing shop of my own, many of my best customers are fashion designers. Perhaps they're inspired by the old styles, but maybe they're copying them?....in that case, they can't usually duplicate them because we don't make the old fabrics and don't finish garments to the standards that we used to.

Even if they're going to produce an exact copy - and yes, it happens - I don't mind because I love the old things and I'd rather see a repro flapper gown than another shapeless polyester smock. Fashion is a commercial world, and is dictated by the market and what will sell: all designers like to produce creative, cutting edge garments but the reality is that they need to cater to their audience most of the time. Vintage garments and accessories come with a proven track record: they've stood the test of time. Something that still looks good and desirable after many decades will be saleable.

Sure, it's disappointing that Anna Sui didn't make more changes to the original design, but perhaps she (or her assistants) saw it as already perfect and not needing modifications? Perhaps the colour scheme matched her season's range? Heck, perhaps it even inspired the whole range? Who knows - all I know is that copying is a commercial reality and as much as we'd like it to be otherwise, it's not going to change any time soon.

 

I too was naive enough to not realize designers considered copying something as "design".

Its not design, its having good eye and marketing skills and access to people who can reproduce something. There is nothing about it that is original.

Leaving aside the fact that it happens, that its not illegal, etc....isnt it a shame? Isnt it wrong for someone to put their name on something someone else designed, no matter how long ago? Isn't it misleading your customers, your investors, your supporters....into thinking you've "created" something when all you've done is rip it off?

Its funny that its considered tolerable in this case merely because this has no label. If a designer grabbed an Adrian from the 40s and copied it line for line and put their label in it (and it was pointed out), we'd be calling foul. If they copied a 50s Dior & called it their own design, the fashion world would crucify them.

It makes me sad that this happens, because it demeans the concept of fashion DESIGN. It makes me sadder yet that people think its ok. If the only thought going into a "design" is where to find something cool with no label and then who to commission to recreate it....thats not design. Reproduction is all well and good but this is not being put out there as a repro, its gracing the runway emitting oohs & ahhs and inspiring reviews from critics as if the design came from the mind (or design house) of Anna Sui, and it didnt.

Blurring the line between a direct copy and inspiration paves the way for even less originality......I'm really surprised designers would even WANT to put something out that isnt their very own work.

As for inspiring people to buy beaded bags that are really vintage? Maybe, MAYBE, if Sui announced it was a copy and she loved vintage beaded bags....maybe the masses who allow top designers who dictate how they dress would follow her lead.

But they're far more likely to buy HER bag, and the ensuing knock offs which will be cheaper, than to venture into vintage territory.

I dont have any issue w/ a designer buying vintage to inspire an original piece. Fully support the idea.

This however is not inspired by, it is not at all original. If it had been modified a little I would be impressed....but as it is, anyone could do what Sui did with that bag with the right resources, you know? I'm honestly amazed designers don't WANT to do original things, that they're comfortable stealing a whole look line for line....it seems so lazy!

Anyway, whatever, call it an eye opening experience......

Ang

 

And another thing. Why are we as vintage dealers allowing people to do this? We already HAVE the great stuff. Why are we comfortable with designers buying it at whatever price we set (yes, we like money, sure) to then turn around, steal the design and make thousands more than we make? Shouldnt we be working to make the public aware that this stuff exists without having to pay designer prices rather than accepting that this is the way things are "done"?

Granted, once its copied, at least its available to more people in current sizing.

But there are repro companies doing just that, and not lying about it.

This really bugs me, because I love fashion and even spent some time in school studying fashion design, wanting to be a designer myself. I hate that this is acceptable.

I think I'll just design my own label, start slapping it on every vintage piece in my shop that is label-free and call them my own, one of a kind original designs. Saves me the trouble of even finding someone to reproduce them!

:party:

Ang

 

To be perfectly honest I am surprised you are all surprised! This has been going on for decades, especially since the early 1980s when designers like Ralph Lauren began blatantly reviving historic styles in their own collections. The biggest buyers of vintage at the Manhattan vintage show are 7th avenue designer assistants who go to buy 'inspirations' (assistants are sent so that nobody can guess what the designers are being inspired by.)

Project Runway suggests designers work in a vacuum without inspiration from other sources but that is so untrue. It is unrealistic to expect even the most talented designer to constantly come up with fresh ideas that are bang on each season. Most designers have their own schtik and reinvent it year after year (YSL tuxedo pant suit, CHanel suit, Madame Gres draped Goddess gown...) or are good for only a few years before they start running out of ideas and begin revisiting old ideas or go down in quality (Dior, Halston, Adrian...)

The original design of the beaded bag was not identified or patented and even if it was, it is older than 1927 so it's out of copyright protection and safe to copy. It was the original colourway and pattern that attracted Sui, so it makes sense they would copy it nearly identically. However, if you look closely it isn't an exact copy - they altered some of the lines and added fuchsia in the centre flower, so it can be technically called an inspiration. Ralph Lauren got caught copying the tuxedo suit patented by YSL and he would have gotten away with it if he hadn't exactly copied a 1972 YSL tuxedo pant suit line for line.

 

Guess I'm just naive, doe-eyed and wet behind the ears.....

:clueless:

I was aware of inspiration from vintage, thats a no-brainer, nothing new is really totally "NEW"....but I am surprised that copying is ok. Even if in this case its a few beads different, it sounds like this "kind of thing happens all the time"....sometimes without modifications at all!

And I still think thats sad.

Ang

 

Here's how "designer" Kate Moss does it, according to an article in the August issue of Vogue:

"...Kate heads to her office on the fourth floor, where two young female designers are waiting. The room is bulging with vintage finds - thirties satin cocktail dresses, hippie-ish printed blouses, rock-'n-roll T-shirts. Amelia, one of the designers, shows Kate a black and net dress that is the inspiration for the party dresses..."

Apparently all she does is shake her head, yes or no.

 

There's a woman in California who does this. Of course she "improves" the design first.

 

I’m not so sure that it’s surprising. I’ve spoken to vintage sellers at fairs about this sort of thing, and I am aware that is happens. But, I agree with ang, that doesn’t make it right! The British high street store “oasis” did a vintage collection a few years ago, where they’d sourced vintage dresses and reproduced them nearly identical, but they let everyone know what they were doing, and put a picture of the original dress on the label, and where they’d found it.

I think the fact that this happens all the time, and is standard industry practise, doesn’t make it acceptable. Anna Sui is reproducing, not designing .

It makes me wonder, she’s well known for her vintage style, what else has she copied stitch for stitch?

 

That was very classy of them, and very clever, too--with so much clothing production now being outsourced to overseas sweatshops, I could care less about contemporary labels, but that's one label I'd find VERY appealing!

This has been a fascinating thread--following the debate over what constitutes inspiration and design vs reproduction and/or plagiarism makes me think of Talmudic debate (over the Bible, where equally impressive schools of thought argue both sides of an issue through the ages...)

For me, even if it's not illegal (because the bag design was unlabelled/pre-1927/etc), the too-close copying presented as an original design ain't kosher, and certainly gets egg all over the face of the designer who does it (even if an assistant was responsible in this case). Laziness, sloppiness, fraud--ah, the continuum...

I was so excited to sell a 60s needlepoint bag to a Sui assistant two years ago (ironically, the label was "Christine custom bags"--wonder what the implications of that "custom" would be as far as copyright law?) I posted about it here and there was speculation re whether it was for "design inspiration" (quotes necessary now, after the rip off of Ang's bag...) or for Sui's personal use. Wish I had snooped about more at the time...

 

Darn it. This is one topic where I wish I could not be middle of the road. I usually have a clear opinion on things but to me, this is not so black and white.

On one hand, it's easy to see why this happens. A lot of eras of clothing were/are just amazing. I get excited to see styles return, especially very feminine ones.

On the other hand, it does anger me when creativity suffers because of laziness. Maybe laziness is the wrong term too? I mean, with the pressure to keep coming up with the next best thing --maybe it's just too much for these designers. I don't know. That's me *trying* to be fair. After all, how many different versions of pants can you come up with? So much has already been done. But I have a definite problem with direct copying. Inspiration is one thing, but these designers are paid a lot to at the very least put their own spin on their creations. And that's the very least that should be done.


All we can do is bring this into light in our own way. Sure, they'll be making huge money off of the copied items. We can't really change that. But what we can do is market our items that have been ripped off by these designers, as the real thing. No it won't resonate with everybody and ALL potential customers. But then again we all know that vintage isn't for everyone. Some people cannot get past "old" and want "new" everything. I know people like this. They wouldn't buy from a vintage seller anyway so we just have to continue to market to the folks we always have and inform them. Eventually, word will spread and those who haven't discovered vintage yet, will begin to. Those who want mothing to do with it...well...they can spend thousands on rip offs.

I belive in a positive message. You can't go wrong. We just have to make sure the message is repeated and heard. Know what I mean?

Sorry for being long-winded. I just have a lot to say about this topic.

Vintage Kisses,
Tara