viz.

This week the Village Voice reported that Anthropolgie is joining the legion of designers suing Forever 21, the chain that (re)produces trendy looks for the masses (read: their clothes are really cheap). Anna Sui campaigned against the store during Fashion Week (she handed out t shirts with the store's owners on a "wanted" poster) and Diane Von Furstenberg is lobbying Congress to "improve" copyright law when it comes to fashion.
DVF dress on the left, Forever 21 on the right

The chain, these designers argue, is too close for comfort on some of its clothes and it seems like the haute couture is determined to keep the hoi polloi out of their closets. But what is at stake here? Currently, you CANNOT copyright a dress, and many are suspicious of this debate because fashion has always looked to others for inspiration. So the designers focus on the details - like fabric instead of cut or resemblance to their trademark (Gwen Stefani). DVF's lawyers are actually arguing that someone might think that they are buying an original when they go for these knockoffs, but anyone paying $33 instead of $350 knows that this isn't just about getting a great deal. I think this has more to do with social capital than actual capital - no one I know who shops at Forever 21 (and I know a few) is choosing the store over a designer boutique: they don't have access to those modes of acquisition. Perhaps what scares these designers the most is the accessibility argued by the availability of their designs. By claiming copyright infringement and a "take back the dress" mentality, these designers are not only making claims of ownership over the clothes but over the clientele as well.