Tom Ford also argues that creating a quality product, design or idea that is targeted to the right market will not be effected by fake rip-offs. What is also interesting is the vast disparity in sales between industries with low copyright protection & industries with high copyright protection.
For more detailed study you can visit readytoshare and see the project.
"Reuse, repurpose, redefine, recreate, recombine – any way you look at it, the genius of the fashion industry is its ability to thrive in a system built upon borrowed inspiration.
Whether inspiration comes from fellow designers, vintage patterns, street kids or royalty, fashion designers openly pay homage to their influences through appropriation. Each new wave of designers depends upon its predecessors. And, because fashion (like DNA) is recombinant to its core, no one presumes that they can own design elements such as the Dolman sleeve, the trench coat or the pearl neckline.
As long as there is no trademark infringement, designers are free to roam the creative landscape, sampling what they wish. Just imagine if it were the same in other industries."
So, as a designer, an architect, how do I feel about this. are my creations considered utilitarian (& thus void of copyright) or as art (which enjoys protection). Is the crap hotel room art (purchased on mass & exactly the same for each room) art or utilitarian? Do I enjoy a silent comfort out of knowing that no-one can copy my design & therefore, not try harder next time?
I agree with Salvidor Dali's sentiment that "Those who do not want to imitate anything, produce nothing" . Personally I think that, as designers, we are all subconsciously referring to someone else's work. we do not design in a vacuum (unless you actually live in a vacuum).
How would you feel if your industry was less protected by copyright laws.
