Wheat Thins or Thin Wheat? Lululemon or Kirkland? Copycat versions of clothing, accessories, food, and more are everywhere. So-called “dupes” (from “duplicate”) have become legal minefields. Can consumers get quality products at lower prices than the big name-brands charge?
For years, companies have rolled out options for cost-conscious consumers. These less pricey products are often styled after name-brands or designer labels. Not all deliver on the quality, though.
Imitating excellence isn’t wrong. (Ephesians 5:1; 1 Corinthians 11:1) Product creators naturally select the finest or most popular examples for inspiration. But just as workers deserve pay, (1 Timothy 5:18) designers and sellers deserve compensation for their efforts. Theft of a design is wrong, obviously. The tension between recompense and stewardship crops up in the world of dupes.
Dupe fashion exploded thanks to social media. Love the $3,250 Celine bucket bag? Target has a $25 version. “The way that my jaw literally dropped when I saw this,” gushes one “influencer” in a segment on dupes. It’s clear she thinks the copy closely mimics the luxe original.
So which is worse: the high price tag or the oh-so-close copycat?
Alexandra Roberts teaches law and media. She says some dupes move into shaky legal territory, including trademark infringement. According to Roberts, direct copies of products that feature trademarks or logos are illegal. But dupes that simply resemble certain features are usually acceptable.
Apparel company Lululemon claims wholesale club Costco sells knockoffs that copy its trademarked designs. One item is a pair of athleisure pants from Costco’s Kirkland brand.
Roberts’ opinion is that the disputed part of the pant “looks pretty functional,” and function isn’t protected under trademark law.
But Lululemon officials also allege that some Costco shoppers may believe Kirkland-branded products are made by authentic suppliers of the originals. That argument, Roberts says, could help Lululemon’s case.
Trademark disputes often hinge on whether a dupe purposely confuses or tries to deceive consumers. If a product is clearly labeled as a knockoff with no attempt to pass it off as the real deal, it may not be illegal.
Over on the food aisle, snack giant Mondelez International is suing discount supermarket chain Aldi for trademark infringement. Mondelez alleges Aldi packaging is “likely to deceive and confuse.” It wants to stop Aldi from selling dupes, including copycats of Chips Ahoy, Wheat Thins, and Oreos.
Decide for yourself: Aldi’s Thin Wheat crackers come in a gold box similar to Mondelez’s Wheat Thins. Aldi’s chocolate sandwich cookies feature bright blue packaging like Oreos. Are you confused?
Why? Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery. But knowing when imitation crosses the line into deception is essential. Frugal customers need discernment.
