•  
  •  
 

University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review

Abstract

Copyright protection for fashion designs has always been slim, especially when it comes to shoes. Times seem to be changing as calls for increased protection in the industry have generated a new focus on changing the nature of copyright laws to better protect designs and designers. Two of the world’s fashion meccas, the United States and European Union, have their own different approaches to this issue. In the last decade, each territory’s most influential court, the United States Supreme Court in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands and the Court of Justice in the European Union in Cofemel v. G–Star Raw, has issued decisions that reshaped copyright law in their respective countries. This Note examines how these two monumental copyright decisions have altered the laws and impacted the shoe industry. Focusing on the recent Ganni v. Steve Madden decision, where the Danish court barred Steve Madden from selling one of its pairs of shoes, holding it infringed on Ganni’s Danish and European Union copyright–protected design, this Note analyzes how litigation ensued in both the United States and European Union, compares the differing results, and assesses how these developments may impact the “dupe” market or protect shoe designers, if at all. Ultimately, the dupe debate comes down to one question: Will Steve Madden be able to keep it up with the knockoffs? This Note proposes that the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court’s decision and rationale is spot on and that, in light of the differences between the United States and European Union copyright regimes, the United States should modify their Trademark Counterfeiting Act of 1984 to include registered copyrights and help designers shield their products from being duped.

Download

Share

COinS