A loungewear/athleisure fashion brand ‘Lululemon’ filed a lawsuit on the 27th of August in the state of California which alleged the wholesale brand ‘Costco’ had been infringing on their intellectual property rights, patents and trademark laws that protect the ownership of their designs and apparels.
This came about because Costco had begun selling athleisure-wear such as hoodies and leggings that became increasingly popular on social media, with influencers deeming them ‘dupes’ of the popular Lululemon apparel. Dupes- short for duplicate- occur when a product resembles a more expensive, often high-end branded product but is sold at a cheaper rate.They are not usually classed as counterfeit as they do not aim to copy trademarked logos or brand names. This escalated on social media, to the point that there were hashtags under viral videos of influencer ‘hauls’ and ‘try-ons’ which said ‘#lululemondupes’.
The lawsuit itself alleges that Costco had been selling these dupes under its own Kirkland brand to “Confuse consumers at the point-of-sale and/or observers post-sale into believing that the ‘dupes’ are Plaintiff’s authentic products when they are not” according to the Lululemon. It also specifies that the Kirkland range copies items such as their Scuba hoodies, Define jackets and their ABC pants.
When filing the lawsuit, Lululemon cited two separate news articles from the Washington Post and The New York Times, in which the authors discussed the similarities of the clothing items and in the New York Times article the author had even stated “ When I’d held these two pairs of pants and inspected their construction, they looked almost identical.”
What makes Costco’s ‘dupes’ different from other examples of ‘dupes’?
Companies are legally allowed to compete with Lululemon by offering relatively similar items of clothing for a cheaper price. Examples of this would be H&M or Primark, who sell similar products that have gone viral on social media for being ‘dupes’ without infringing on Lululemon’s laws and protections that Costco has been accused of violating.
One of the key examples that Lululemon gave of Costco’s alleged infringement, was a screenshot of the Costco website that showed a man’s sweatshirt which was being sold as a “Hi-Tec Men’s scuba full zip”. This was significant as Lululemon states that its “SCUBA” line is protected under US patent and trademark laws.
There has been a large wave of support from the public for Costco themselves, many public consumers have stated that they do not want to pay Lululemon’s prices and the Kirkland range was a much better alternative which they didn’t assume at all to be distributed by Lululemon. However some other people believe that this lawsuit isn’t just about protecting the company’s designs but also their reputation as a brand and to clamp down on unfair competitors.
Whilst there hasn’t been an outcome to this lawsuit yet, most of these dupes have been removed off of Costco’s website. In the wider context, this lawsuit is important as it encapsulates the growing trend of dupes in the fashion industry and how companies are pedalling out cheaper alternatives without infringing intellectual property laws, but with this there is the question of where can the line be drawn between these dupes and actual infringement.
By Lilly-Jane Hopkins of Christ the King College, Isle of Wight.
