or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › The WAYWT Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The WAYWT Discussion Thread - Page 4374  

post #65596 of 117677
mf, it's less cohesive than your normal fits. kind of a workwear/sailor/biker top with a loungey hippie bottom.
post #65597 of 117677
where is that skull necklace from? ann d? number nine? i feel like i've seen it before
post #65598 of 117677
From_hell_tpb.jpg
post #65599 of 117677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raindrop View Post



He makes it work.

that's like justifying that a forged picasso still looks good on the wall. its the principle. fueling the fake garment business is bad for everyone. one would think that the people here would be the first ones to standup against fake clothing rather than applaud it.


i see miran is still butthurt. lol8[1].gif
post #65600 of 117677
Quote:
Originally Posted by sq4you View Post

that's like justifying that a forged picasso still looks good on the wall. its the principle. fueling the fake garment business is bad for everyone. one would think that the people here would be the first ones to standup against fake clothing rather than applaud it.
i see miran is still butthurt. lol8[1].gif

I think Nike would win a trademark infringement suit against RO for those particular dunks. It's an 8 part test:

Strength of the mark (swoosh is very strong)
Proximity of the goods (same position on shoe)
Similarity of the marks (very similar)
Evidence of actual confusion (surely some)
Marketing channels used (similar - fashion media)
Type of goods and the degree of care likely to be exercised by the purchaser (similar; see high end throwback nike market)
Defendant's intent in selecting the mark (to copy nike)
Likelihood of expansion of the product lines (high; see throwback nike market)

I don't think their case is any weaker than Levi's against Evisu etc.
post #65601 of 117677
I'm of the mind that that fake RO fit kind of sucks. Not even counting the fake dunks, I don't like the baggy denim at all.
post #65602 of 117677
johanm - you may well be correct but I don't think sq4 was making a legal argument here. One is a derivative design that's meant to play on the original Nike design and distort it completely into a new shoe that makes reference to the original without ripping it off. Same thing with the Raf sneakers that are derivatives of Nike Vandals, just made sleeker, higher quality and without the swoosh.

Those, however, are simply a knock-off of the RO dunks. I'm sure they took care of having a few differentiating details but overall doesn't seem like an hommage or derivative, simply a copy.

I can't argue the legal case here but I do think there's an ethical difference between the two.
post #65603 of 117677
Quote:
Originally Posted by johanm View Post

I think Nike would win a trademark infringement suit against RO for those particular dunks. It's an 8 part test:
Strength of the mark (swoosh is very strong)
Proximity of the goods (same position on shoe)
Similarity of the marks (very similar)
Evidence of actual confusion (surely some)
Marketing channels used (similar - fashion media)
Type of goods and the degree of care likely to be exercised by the purchaser (similar; see high end throwback nike market)
Defendant's intent in selecting the mark (to copy nike)
Likelihood of expansion of the product lines (high; see throwback nike market)
I don't think their case is any weaker than Levi's against Evisu etc.

well i wasn't really talking about trademark infringement. while the swoosh bears a slight resemblance, the fake ricks are a design copy of the real ricks. the real ricks are not a design copy of any nike shoe.

IANAL but I think trademark cases are generally won when one can show that the "infringer" is using it to confuse consumers, dilution and self gain.
it would be hard for nike to demonstrate Rick had any of those intentions....especially considering nikes are 200 bucks, the ricks were like 1400 and there are maybe 5 stores in america that would sell the ricks.

edit: yah gdl beat me to it.
post #65604 of 117677
I think you guys are right in that there's an ethical difference - by buying the counterfeit dunks you are ripping off both Nike and RO. I just think the swoosh ripoff in the authentic dunks is in poor form, so RO is not totally on the high ground in terms of intellectual property rights. It's fair enough to imitate the general design of a garment/shoe, but once you start ripping off a distinctive logo, you dilute the significance of the logo as a unique identifier in the marketplace.
post #65605 of 117677

 

IMG_1539s.jpg

post #65606 of 117677
I predict 78 thumbs up.
post #65607 of 117677
Quote:
Originally Posted by johanm View Post

I think you guys are right in that there's an ethical difference - by buying the counterfeit dunks you are ripping off both Nike and RO. I just think the swoosh ripoff in the authentic dunks is in poor form, so RO is not totally on the high ground in terms of intellectual property rights. It's fair enough to imitate the general design of a garment/shoe, but once you start ripping off a distinctive logo, you dilute the significance of the logo as a unique identifier in the marketplace.

yeah its definitely not "black and white" (mwink[1].gif) with regards to ricks original intentions. however i think gdl was correct in stating that rick's high tops are an artistic reinterpretation (or "distortion" in his original words) of the nike trainer. he probably did it with pejorative intentions even....?
post #65608 of 117677

SVB ballin´ like the best  icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

post #65609 of 117677
Quote:
Originally Posted by artishard116 View Post

625

763

speaking of fake dunks, my best artishard impression redface.gif
post #65610 of 117677
SVB, good to see you finally realized those are pajama pants.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › The WAYWT Discussion Thread