Adventures in Copyright Infringement: Why?

Apr 25, 2007 @ 3:01pm

Confession:

I noticed that Land's End had a new clunk that copies the Croc and didn't blog it for two weeks.

Why?

Because I'm not sure the shoes are "fashion." They're great for gardening. They're fun if you're at the beach and need to catch your own dinner. But the only runway where I've spotted them was during the Kent State Senior Fashion Show and, well, we all know the verdict on that.

But then I noticed something fun.

Not only is Land's End copying the Croc, but they're also selling the Croc, for $5 more, on their own website!

Can anyone explain the appeal of these shoes, and also the odd business decision?

posted by gabs

Apr 25, 2007 4:14PM

wal-mart and target have copied it too. either way, it's heinous....merrils are the only acceptable comf. shoe.

posted by burberry jelly

Apr 25, 2007 4:30PM

keep reading that crocs are the most searched for fashion item in the UK?!

the prima ballet flats are sort of sweet, maybe: http://shop.crocs.com/pc-33-4-prima.aspx?reqid=33&reqProdTypeId=41p&subsectionname=footwear§ion=products

still, for the money, wouldn't it be more fun to splurge on cheap designer jelly? Marc Jacobs ($155) Ferragamo ($100) or even Marc by Marc's ($59)

posted by meganz

Apr 25, 2007 4:54PM

I picked up a pair of the Ballerina flats at Bloomingdales before I went to Italy last summer...while I'd never wear the traditional crocs, the flats were super comfy and slightly less offensive. slightly.

posted by booski

Apr 25, 2007 5:00PM

A friend had them at work. I tried them on. My eyes said "Yuck", my feet said "AH".

I'm now having an argument between my top and bottom halves: to buy or not to buy.

posted by pienkna

Apr 25, 2007 5:14PM

They are quite fugly. I do have a pair of the Primas to run around in...cute, in a sneaker kind of way. I have to say, though the appeal in these is certainly the comfort. Unbelievable comfort. That said, I wouldn't wear them out on the street. In my backyard? Certainly. To the mall? Never.

posted by MH

Apr 25, 2007 5:21PM

I mean, the comfort argument about Crocs only extends as far as it does for things like ratty sweatpants and shirts with moth holes--keep it in the house where no one has to see it. And while we all empathize with the comfort factor, that doesn't make it okay.

posted by kristen

Apr 25, 2007 7:21PM

Crocs work for Mario Batali and that's about it. The really unbelievable part is that Land's End managed to make their knock-off even uglier than the original. Maybe they're selling both theirs and the real deal as a tactic to ward off copyright lawsuits?

posted by questionable

Apr 25, 2007 7:29PM

doesn't an item have to be copyrighted to be infringement? im all for a designers right to copyright but until the law is past they are copying they are not infringing.

posted by guest

Apr 26, 2007 9:36AM

Another jibe against KSU? Booo, Fashionista, booo.

And what, pray tell, would Fashionista have the wee tyke at the Kent State fashion show wear on her feet instead of brightly colored cartoon shoes?

God forbid the child is comfortable and cute during the few years when it is socially acceptable to be such. She ought to be squeezing herself into the narrow box of fashion as we speak, so that she'll be old hat at successfully shopping her way to being an empty-headed plastic twat by the time she's a 'tween.

posted by Helen

Apr 26, 2007 9:47AM

Crocs are being banned left and right at hospitals in Europe. Why? Because they generate so much static electricity that they are messing with the machines. Down with Crocs! Go for Danskos. They're cute and last forever (if you've got the right shoe guy).

posted by Faran

Apr 26, 2007 10:16AM

Re: That KSU outfit...

Look, kids should absolutely be comfortable, but design can go hand in hand with social progress.

Architects have argued for years that good design promotes good living, and if cities are beautiful, then merely being surrounded by good design will provoke citizens to live more beautifully. There are studies that back up this idea, too.

And why wouldn't this also extend beyond architecture to fashion? When you throw a kid into a poorly made, poorly designed mesh of neon vomit (as seen in that photo), you ultimately encourage lower standards of living. It's not just a t-shirt, it's something that interacts with a hundred people on a daily basis, and that should require more thought.

Also: spare me the "kids shouldn't be exposed to society's ideals about beauty" business as an excuse for this outfit.

After all, this kid's mom allowed her daughter to walk down a runway and strike that ridiculous pose - one modeled on sexualized adults - didn't she?

Ok. Cerulean anyone?

posted by Auntie Fashion

Apr 26, 2007 12:53PM

not ALL fashion is your Fashion and not for everyone.

For some Comfort is Beauty and besides what most fashionistas love love love today will be bye bye bye tomorrow.
OH and trust if some uppity up up (say a young socailite,or a self described/delusional dandy)
decided to wear them, trust fashionista would most likely get a pair.

posted by guest

Apr 26, 2007 1:40PM

payless also has a crocs rip off by airwalk i think

posted by Chels

Apr 26, 2007 4:00PM

The ONLY circumstance under which I'd get a pair is for kayaking, since they float and stay on your feet, which flip-flops don't.

As for kids, I think they're fine for certain kids. I mean, if you have active kids who are running around all the time, in and out of water, it makes sense. But on a runway? That's just bizarre.

posted by Casey Miller

Apr 26, 2007 7:02PM

i have a pair in black. as a recent nyc to west coast transplant, i have to say they are comfortable and wear them for running errands and such.