2017 has reached the end. Looking back at this year, the apparel industry was not peaceful. Together, the “war of words” was played one after another. Whether it is plagiarism or plagiarism, whether it is between a brand and a brand, or between a brand and a designer, the word “plagiarism” is constantly spreading. What exactly is the war of words in the apparel industry in 2017? How can we look at the “occupationism” that has evolved into a common phenomenon in the industry?



It has long been no secret that Zara copied it, or said that it is a new work for high fashion brands. However, there are some elements of the hidden plagiarism that belong to the type of eggs that challenge the fashion knowledge of foreigners. For example, recently, netizens discovered a women's Army Green Parka coat. Its most notable design feature is a lined strap that allows the wearer to wait at indoor temperatures. On higher occasions, the coat is carried back like a backpack. As everyone knows, from the illustration of the strap design to the liner, all this is allegedly copied from ACRONYM, a functional equipment brand founded in 2002 in Germany.



With as many as 4,500 ASOS items on the new product every week, the speed can give up a few of the fast-fashioned predecessors Zara and H&M. Philipp Plein Jacket But it also failed to break away from the criticism of fast fashion: plagiarism. British designer brand Laurie Lee Leather recently broke the news that ASOS has copied its own design and put on a comparison chart in order to obtain a clear source.



After the Gucci 2018 early spring series was released in Florence, Italy, it has been controversial. A few days ago, two designers held a press conference to say that Alessandro Michele, creative director of Gucci, plagiarised their works. They were the snakes on the "Guccifying" T-shirts and the cheetah designs on handbags.



Site Bonnie Cashin Archives owner Stephanie Lake posted a picture in his instagram account alleging that CALVIN KLEIN's latest issue of an orange cloak was suspected of being copied by Bonnie Cashin's 1978 design. Although Bonnie Cashin's name is somewhat strange to the public, he was Coach's first designer and was considered a pioneer in American fashion.



New Balance continues to be troubled by Shanzhai brand in China. On October 26th, New Balance Trade (China) Co., Ltd. and the two defendant companies held the second hearing of the second instance in Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court on the “N” trademark case, and the two parties supplemented the exchange of new evidence.



Recently, the designer's name brand Philipp Plein's 2017 Fall Winter Collection fashion show was held in New York. After the show, Alexander Wang released the video of the show and his 2014 and H&M collaboration series fashion show for comparison. Whether it is lighting, display or product design is very similar, Alexander Wang also used a copy of the seditious Philipp Plein plagiarism behavior.



In recent years, Adidas has restored the shoe "Stan Smith" (commonly known as "small white shoes") of the 1970s and has achieved great success. This not only made American competitor Nike “irritated”, but also made the “brother company” furious. Philipp Plein Beach Shorts It sued Adidas to the German court under the pretext of “designed theft”. Hummer believes that Adidas' retro shoes "Stan Smith" infringed on the company's two design models and asked the court to punish Adidas.



Lululemon, who applied for patent protection for the design of the sports bra, initiated a lawsuit in the Delaware court to sue Anderma for infringement of its patent and commercial appearance. Lululemon claimed that the defendant’s four sports bras copied its Energy Bra's double-cross strap design. Energy Bra was launched by Lululemon Philipp Plein T shirt in 2011 and has obtained two design patents in 2014 and 2016.


In March 2017, Adidas Americas filed a lawsuit against Forever 21 and its suppliers in Oregon, arguing that it improperly used the “three bars” logo registered by Adidas. Adidas believes that Forever 21 is suspected of trademark infringement and dilution, unfair competition and fraudulent transactions, and requires the court to force Forever 21 to stop selling the allegedly infringing products and seek compensation, including loss of profits and punitive damages.