Skip to main content

TED Lessons from fashion's free culture - Johanna Blakley (2010)

  • fashion industry doesn't have copyright, you can copy someone's design under your own protected trademark with impunity
  • clothes are too utilitarian was the reason it was decided it shouldn't be protected
  • they are 'influenced' by the broadest pallettes - everyone else's ideas - a culture of copying
    copyright thinking goes that if there's no ownership, there's no incentive to create... crap
  • designers contstantly sue people copying them, and they lose
  • Tom Ford - The counterfeit customer is not our customer, (so we aren't worrying about copying).
  • virtues of copying - breathes life into old trends, vast pallette, trends get established more quickly
  • induced obsolescence accellerates change, initiates innovation
  • designers create a signature look and everyone knows when they are being copied
  • jokes can't be copyrighted, food can't be copyrighted, cars can't be copyrighted, furniture, magic, hairdos, opensource software, databases, tattoo artists shares, fireworks, game rules, smell of perfume - comics now have personas, and it works the same as a designer
  • designers copy themselves
  • in Japan they are protected, but they can't prove their novelty standard the criteria are too high
  • in Europe the novelty standard is too low, slight changes result in new protections
  • who owns a look is hard to pin down
  • and don't talk to me about money - the copyrighted industries earn a FRACTION of the non-copyrighted industries (you should see this graph... I've popped it in down below. Mindblowing x 855 x 855. Zap!)
  • suggests the fashion industry provides a better industry to use as a model in the digital future
  • readytoshare.org

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On 'natural'

I don't think 'natural' is good. There are many things that we apply (some almost arbitrary) (some ignorant and backward ideas of natural and not-natural agenda-propagating) rules of morality. I think 'natural' is a political rhetoric, profoundly abused.  'Diversity' is the only defensible rhetoric for 'thinking' beings. We are not, of course, the only creatures that do thinking, but we are the only creatures with the power to oppress others and other creatures whose languages we don't understand.  Us (badly) thinking creatures, slowly, ponderously gathering the evidence of our badness (I see no reason for your (god's) patience with us), have the ability to decide to be better than (the fashionable) 'natural' of the day.  It is our responsibility to transcend our vileness. Just that. That one task. Our thinkingness I believe is for that. A world (constructed by god) to demonstrate this point. And we will find every rhetor...
Post a Comment
Read more

Richard Dawkins on militant atheism

Dawkins has become outspoken in his atheism , coining the word "bright" (as an alternate to atheist), and encouraging fellow non-believers to stand up and be identified. intelligent design is creationism redressed creationists are right that evolution is hostile to evolution statistical improbability of the complexity of design - intelligent design but the intelligent designer wouldn't have made such a hash - why would the designer be bothered with disapproving of our sex lives, favor our side in the war Dawkins suggest rocking the boat - attack religion as a whole taboo of speaking ill about religion - Douglas Adams said, sacred ideas at the heart of religion, holy cows, you can support any operating system you want, but the challenge of religious ideas is off limits science and religion are corrosive to each other - religious explanations are trivial and improbably, teaches people to accept authoritarianism takes the example of famous scientists and imagines ...
6 comments
Read more

Mary Daly explains the pejoration (of one) of the words related to women

Of Death and Conscience: Brief thoughts on gender role and the values of the dominant culture in medicine : "“Under the influence of the Church and the newly formed male-dominated medical establishment, the word “witch,” which originally meant “wise one,” became a term of scorn. It took a reign of terror lasting several hundred years to radically alter a way of life thousands of years old. Millions of women who carried the healing lineage were systematically killed (see The Church and the Second Sex by Mary Daly).”"
4 comments
Read more