Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Knock-Off Fashion
I'm very happy that James Surowiecki has used his bully pulpit in the annual Style Issue of the New Yorker (perfect bound, with a Gucci ad on the outside back cover) to take a well-aimed potshot at the ridiculous (and counterproductive) idea that designers should be able to copyright their clothes. Surowiecki convincingly explains that when clothes are copied that's good for the original designers, not bad.
I do, however, have one question about Surowiecki's description of the extent of the "problem," insofar as it's a problem at all (it isn't). He paints a picture of knock-off artists scurrying to copy all the latest designs, and even claims that "private-label designers for major department stores trumpet the fidelity of their imitations."
This doesn't ring true to me. After all, major department stores are precisely where the high-priced originals tend to get sold: would they really hire people whose job is to copy those high-priced originals as faithfully as possible – and then allow those designers to "trumpet the fidelity of their imitations" in public? That doesn't sound like good business to me.
On the other hand, as Surowiecki notes, people in the fashion industry don't always act in a profit-maximizing way. If they did, they wouldn't be supporting this bill. And Condé Nast, which is a prime recipient of the fashion industry's billions, might not be so keen to risk angering its biggest advertisers by publishing Surowiecki's column.






