When Renee, Meg, and Sydney were discussing Lilly Pulitzer suing Old Navy, my gut instinct was to side with Old Navy. Without clicking on the link to the article that was sent, I figured – how similar could the designs really be? I thought Lilly was probably overreacting, and decided: if Old Navy made something that similar to Lilly designs, surely I would’ve seen it by now.
And one other thought that went through my head: Old Navy is probably just trying to make preppy style more accessible – after all, Lilly can get crazy expensive, especially for just a plain pair of shorts or a simple shirt.
I finally clicked on the article sent and saw how grossly mistaken I was – Old Navy so heavily copied Lilly Pulitzer, it’s absolutely insane. As someone interested in business law, I thought this was one of the best ways to see how fashion ties into that. Fabric patterns are heavily protected and in these sorts of instances, similar prints can warrant an attack.
I think we should all note that there is also an overarching problem that no one at Old Navy spotted these vast similarities – aren’t the people who are approving the designs in-the-know when it comes to the whole fashion industry? And clearly, whoever came up with the textile should be ashamed, because it is obviously neither of the prints on the Old Navy side were even remotely original.
I applaud Lilly Pulitzer on their decision to sue Old Navy, despite my extremely loyal ties to Old Navy. I love that Old Navy takes trends and makes them more affordable (post on that here) – but this is way too far.
I know this article isn’t much that hasn’t already been said, but it truly interested me because it is a growing problem within the fashion industry.
What are your thoughts on this?