SC 47's, Now W/O Pocket Stitching

[Edge_Of_Denim]

I'm a photographer and my wifes a graphic designer and I would hate to think everyone thinks they have the right to things that we've created.

But here's what I don't understand: Aside from file-sharing (and this can be argued to the point of exhaustion), what other egregious act of theft against an artist, photographer, clothing designer, etc, can you or anyone else name that is occuring in this culture, with such rabid frequency, to cause such hysterical alarm? So much of this seems to exist in a purely conjectural space.

[horriblyjollyjinx]

if they make the red tab a different shade of red i wonder if they could get around levis lawers? or is the tab placement itself trademarked?

I believe that the tab on the left side of the right backpocket is a trademark. I don't think color matters, but I'm not sure.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

i understand that it IS the red tab that is trademarked, hence the circle-R-tab-only (sans text) runs that they produce.

PAUL_T?

[horriblyjollyjinx]

i understand that it IS the red tab that is trademarked, hence the circle-R-tab-only (sans text) runs that they produce.

PAUL_T?

yes, but the location might be trademarked itself also.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

i think we may be right! a red tab on left side of right back pocket.

[tweeds]

having a poke around for the exact wording, but here's something interesting, levi strauss vs some company who's been simulating their arcuate:

However, applicant contends that because jeans are

generally marketed with multiple trademarks (for example,

opposer’s jeans generally carry a LEVI’S label, the LEVI’S

red tab attached to the side of the right rear pocket, one

of the “two horses pulling a pair of jeans” labels, the

arcuate stitching on the rear pockets), it is “quite

impossible” (brief, p. 36) for a purchaser seeing

applicant’s jeans pocket stitching design to believe that

applicant’s goods were manufactured by opposer.

full text at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/foia/ttab/2dissues/2000/105453.pdf

[tweeds]

and in another case with howies jeans, the article does confirm that LS has trademarked the position of the tab.

http://www.howies.co.uk/content.php?xId=127&xPg=1

and finally, to anyone who has access to a patents office, look out for these registration numbers:

356,701 (registered May 10, 1938)

516,561 (registered October 18, 1949)

577,490 (registered July 21,1953)

774,625 (registered August 4,1984)

775,412 (registered August 18, 1984)

1,157,769 (registered June 16,1981)

all are listed as "Tab Device trademark".

[justbrowsing]

i always thought the little variations in the arcuates that a lot of companies use kept them legal. oh well, here's hoping the ones in japland don't loose the arcuate as well. of all repro arcuates, sugarcane's is my favorite.

[spiveyt2]

^ The little variations may indeed keep the various companies from breaking any copyright infrigements but that would be up to many courst to decide (once you get through all of the appeals). However, why even bother spending all of the money on legal help when you can make the same pair of jeans just without all of the marks that are obviously take-offs of Levis?

[airfrogusmc]

But here's what I don't understand: Aside from file-sharing (and this can be argued to the point of exhaustion), what other egregious act of theft against an artist, photographer, clothing designer, etc, can you or anyone else name that is occuring in this culture, with such rabid frequency, to cause such hysterical alarm? So much of this seems to exist in a purely conjectural space.

I do find it egregious that people can't understand or even get angry when a company tries to protect a trade mark or copyright. I think it is relavent because I have seen a shift in attitude about protected images even with my own clients.

[rnrswitch]

On the point of photographers: Isn't taking a photograph, in and of itself, a replica. Sure it is altered sometimes, in the case of graphic arts, but isn't the SC arcuate an altered form of the Levis pockets arcuate, or even the tab?

If we are to believe that competition is the basic fundamental of capitalism, then who cares who copies who, because shouldn't the market make the decision as to what the superior product is? The capitalist argument for all you remaining capitalists.

I am not saying that copyright laws are over and done with (although I do tend to agree with DDML that most people are realizing that most copyright laws are a thing of the past), but it is ridiculous that a company can copyright the positioning, color, and size of a tab on the back of jeans. Companies are now staking claim to the human DNA structure by copyrighting each DNA strand they decode. How can companies copyright nature.

[airfrogusmc]

I am not saying that copyright laws are over and done with (although I do tend to agree with DDML that most people are realizing that most copyright laws are a thing of the past), but it is ridiculous that a company can copyright the positioning, color, and size of a tab on the back of jeans. Companies are now staking claim to the human DNA structure by copyrighting each DNA strand they decode. How can companies copyright nature.

I guess my question would be if that was your creation why wouldn't it be OK to copyright/trademark it? Why shouldn't you be the one that benefits from your work and vision? Lee and Wrangler lived within those restrictions and still came up with something original.

On the point of photographers: Isn't taking a photograph, in and of itself, a replica. Sure it is altered sometimes, in the case of graphic arts, but isn't the SC arcuate an altered form of the Levis pockets arcuate, or even the tab?

As far as photography being a replica its the eye and the decision of when to take that representation (the decisive moment; Henri Cartier-Bresson) that makes each photograph individual. And isn't anything in art a replica of what the artist felt about the world as he sees it? And because of that unique vision doesn't he have the right to copyright that image and make any money from the sale of that picture?

[rnrswitch]

I wasn't saying necessarily the artist shouldn't be able copyright and make money off of the image, but it is the image that can be copyrighted. If the artist takes a picture (or paints) with an apple in it, then the artist should only be able to copyright and profit off of their image, not all images of apples. Levis is trying to copyright all images of apples, not just their image of the apple.

[airfrogusmc]

I'm not a big fan of corporations but it is Levis apple. I mean there are other jean companies that have found their own voice Lee, Wrangler to mention two. Maybe some of these other companies should find theres.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

As far as photography being a replica its the eye and the decision of when to take that representation (the decisive moment; Henri Cartier-Bresson) that makes each photograph individual.

this notion is not unique to photography-----take Duchamp's Fountain, it is not the object but the act of POINTING (or Cartier-Bresson's "decisive moment" if you prefer) that elevates it into art. Likewise,should Sugar Cane or any other repro brand be disallowed their opportunity to POINT or bring attention to something's significance by copying it?

the confusion here is the vastly different notions of authorship in Japanese and Western art. Westerners have an illusion of originality along with an imperialist push for innovation for its own sake coupled with a masculine sense of "ownership". Historically, Japanese art is mimetic and does not value innovation qua innovation.

[spiveyt2]

It is amazing to me that there is really an argument for copying the Levis arcuate and red tab. I gott side with airfrog on this one in believing that if Japanese denim companies want to make a product, there is nothing stopping them from doing so except for this strange desire to make obvious reproductions of Levis patents. Regardless of what people think of the law/copyrights, the law continues to exist and the means of excercising it and expressing voice through it (i.e. law suits) continues to exist. There is nothing to stop Sugarcane or anyone else from producing very high quality jeans without using those symbols that are owned by Levis. I wonder if this conversation would still be happening if people were doing high-quality knockoffs of SF sacred cows like Supreme...

[denimdestroyedmylife]

you convinced me

[Guest jeffvyain]

Being a student of the music industry, I would think that companies that wish to do reproductions of older models of jeans which have already hit the market should be able to do so through some sort of a compulsary license. I haven't studied trademarks much, and they are probably quite a bit different than copyright law; however, it is my opinion that through a compulsary license, in which the company like Levi's would HAVE to give companies like Sugarcane a license to create reproductive works in exchange for a fee based upon the number of copies produced for the market, this problem could be solved, much like artists covering other artists' songs. I think these are very comparable situations. I highly doubt a buyer is going to think a pair of Sugarcanes is a pair of Levis, which is usually the question argued over in disputes over trademarks.

[mizanation]

Being a student of the music industry, I would think that companies that wish to do reproductions of older models of jeans which have already hit the market should be able to do so through some sort of a compulsary license. I haven't studied trademarks much, and they are probably quite a bit different than copyright law; however, it is my opinion that through a compulsary license, in which the company, like Levi's, who HAVE to give companies like Sugarcane a license to create reproductive works in exchange for a fee based upon the number of copies produced for the market, this problem could be solved, much like artists covering other artists' songs. I think these are very comparable situations. I highly doubt a buyer is going to think a pair of Sugarcanes is a pair of Levis, which is usually the question argued over in disputes over trademarks.

i've also had some experience with the music industry.

given the current state of the business, i don't think the record industry is a great model to copy. i also disagree about the denim industry and the music industry being similar. the dynamics are completely different. the levi 501 is the definitive blue jean. there is no such definitive song in any genre of music. also, a license holder is NOT required to allow a party use their copyrighted material. original copyright holders withhold sample clearance all the time. this is true for songs and master recordings.

if you were to put a system on denim like the one that exists for music, you would need to have denim "publishing" regulatory companies set up ala ASCAP, BMI and SESAC. if you've dealt with these companies or know how they work, this is not really where you want to be.

[Guest jeffvyain]

sampling and covering are completely different things. A compulsary license is just that--compulsary. The copyright owner of a song really has little to no say in where the song goes after it's first use rights are given up. I'm not saying they are similar industries, but I do believe they are similar concepts.

[mizanation]

imposing compulsories would be very hard to do, especially since most of these companies are in japan. in music, compulsories are only available for sales in the u.s., right?

i agree that they are similar concepts, just as all intellectual property ownership deals with similar issues.

i think the current system is cool. i kinda like how these companies try to get around trademark laws. very creative.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

ah so. it is like the grape: its fine qualities emerge when it is squeezed.

[Guest jeffvyain]

You're right. Compulsary licenses are only US law. There is no universal intellectual property law, though we do have organizations such as the WTO which regulate countries who join. Even that, though, has hardly any power in most cases (just look at China). The key factor here, as I stated before, is that I don't think anyone would buy Full Counts or Sugarcanes or Samurais or any of those brands thinking that they were Levi's. If Levi's were still making jeans as hard as sandpaper, that would at least give them a bit more of an argument. If there is no confusion between products, there is no reason for conflict.

[mizanation]

You're right. Compulsary licenses are only US law. There is no universal intellectual property law, though we do have organizations such as the WTO which regulate countries who join. Even that, though, has hardly any power in most cases (just look at China). The key factor here, as I stated before, is that I don't think anyone would buy Full Counts or Sugarcanes or Samurais or any of those brands thinking that they were Levi's. If Levi's were still making jeans as hard as sandpaper, that would at least give them a bit more of an argument. If there is no confusion between products, there is no reason for conflict.

i agree completely.

i also agree that if levi really focused on making premium jeans, they would give the japanese repro companies a run for their money.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

if US consumers would buy quality products instead of utterly disposable trash, LEVIs would have incentive to up their game. I blame US.

[cheapmuthafukr]

if US consumers would buy quality products instead of utterly disposable trash, LEVIs would have incentive to up their game. I blame US.

the man speaks the truth.

[mizanation]

aah, interesting take on the situation. before, the primary market for premium jeans was in japan, which could be the real reason for creating the LVC line. now, the market is spreading worldwide.

levi strauss definitely has the resources to completely take over the game. i am not sure how much the japanese repros are really cutting into their market share.

[greentea]

aah, interesting take on the situation. before, the primary market for premium jeans was in japan, which could be the real reason for creating the LVC line. now, the market is spreading worldwide.

levi strauss definitely has the resources to completely take over the game. i am not sure how much the japanese repros are really cutting into their market share.

i dont even have a LVC , all japanese,cause japan knows whats up.

[Guest jeffvyain]

The japanese jeans are almost in a different market. If there were no japanese repros I certainly wouldn't fall back to Levi's. I'd just stick with my APCs and then hit up the swedes.

[denimdestroyedmylife]

true, after japan, i'd go french (ALD, APC), then Swedish, then vintage USA, then...