Skip Navigation


Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice Advance Access originally published online on April 3, 2008
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2008 3(6):386-392; doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpn055
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
3/6/386    most recent
jpn055v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Preet, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved

Why America needs a European fashion police

Kamal Preet*
Legal context: This article concerns IP law in the USA and the Registered and Unregistered Community Design and Community trade mark law in the European Union.

Key points: The fashion industry profits from creative content, yet receives no legal protection under IP law in the USA. The argument against protection for fashion works stems from the belief that more design copying will lead to more incentive for new fashion designs, increasing commercial competitiveness. A reflection on challenges in US copyright, patent, and trademark law will explain why the Registered and Unregistered Community Design laws in European Union is the ideal solution for fashion design protection. Proposals to amend the Copyright Act to include the Design Piracy Prohibition Act are insufficient because they still do not provide the option of dual rights for designs. The EU extends its protection to designs that have a different overall appearance and to the trade origin of the product or service under Community trade mark law.

Practical significance: Adopting EU's scheme will provide economic privileges such as jobs and increasing commercial competitiveness within the USA. It will also increase creative expression among many other benefits.

Key Words: The fashion industry, a multi-billion dollar business, profits from creative content, yet receives no legal protection under IP law in the USA. • Proposals in Congress to amend the Copyright Act to include the Design Piracy Prohibition Act are insufficient because they do not provide the option of dual rights providing both design and trade mark protection. • Registered and Unregistered Community Design laws in the European Union provide the ideal solution for fashion design protection because they extend protection to designs that have a different overall appearance and to the trade origin of the product or service under Community trade mark law.

Correspondence: * Email: kpreet{at}piercelaw.edu


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.