Zara Lost The Brand Of Plagiarism. Do You Like It?

After four years, the design infringement case of fast fashion brand Zara and Danish clothing brand Rains was finally defeated by Zara. Zara's practice of "bringing ism" has been criticized in the industry. It has repeatedly been plagued by plagiarism but has never changed its mind. Is this brand consumer still fond of it?

It is reported that the design infringement case of Zara and Rains started with the appearance design of a waterproof coat outline. Rains said that the appearance of Zara's two Parka Coat and Long Jacket waterproof coat outlines were very similar to their own Parker coats. Despite attempts to resolve disputes, Zara parent company Inditex refused to meet with lawyers. Finally, in 2016, Rains filed a lawsuit against the Danish Court authority.

After winning the lawsuit, Rains applied for injunctive relief at the same time as the claim, asking for a permanent ban on Zara's sale of suspected infringing jackets. Rains co founder said the industry had been looking forward to the outcome of this lawsuit, and the global giants could not violate the design rights without restriction.

In fact, this is not the first time that Zara has lost the case in a tort case. As early as 2015, Italy fashion group OTB (Only The Brave) filed a lawsuit against Zara for copying two brands of jeans and sandals from its brand Diesel and Marni. Although Zara insists that there is a significant difference between the lack of original jeans and sandals products, the court finally announced that Zara infringement was established, calling for immediate recall of infringing products, stop sales and payment of $235 for each product. In addition, Zara has been repeatedly plagiarized by luxury fashion brands and artists.

It is reported that Zara has hundreds of teams shuttling between fashion week and show every year to facilitate the latest trend of design. Cheng Weixiong, general manager of textile and clothing brand management and Shanghai Liang Qi Brand Management Co., Ltd., in an interview with the China Daily News reporter, said that Zara positioning is fast fashion, brand new fast, and "adoption doctrine" can quickly return the fashion trend to products.

Meanwhile, garment industry expert Ma Gang told reporters that Zara can get a larger input output ratio through plagiarism. Even if it is judged to be a tort, the amount of compensation that Zara needs to pay is much lower than the profit from the product.

Of course, apart from fast fashion brands, domestic clothing brands are also suspected of plagiarism. In 2018, the sports brand Anta's children's schoolbag design was suspected of plagiarism. Last year, the "shoe king" BELLE was accused of plagiarism by the French luxury brand Louis Weedon (Louis Vuitton); the black whale tide brand of the men's brand Hai Lan's house was also publicly accused by Chao ROARINGWILD for plagiarism.

Cheng Weixiong told reporters that plagiarism seems to have become a common phenomenon in the clothing industry. Cheng Weixiong frankly said that at present, the plagiarism in the clothing industry has the practical problems of insufficient evidence and less compensation. Because fashion industry is changing rapidly, product design involves many elements such as fabric, style, color and so on. Patent application time is much longer than that of a product. Clothing brands tend to focus on creating popular "explosions" instead of patents.

Ma Gang believes that the frequent plagiarism in the clothing industry is essentially the lack of emphasis on intellectual property rights, ignoring the importance of product research and development. Coupled with the lower unit price of clothing products, consumers often do not care about the patent situation of clothing design.