New developments in the Levi's vs Japanese repros story

[hawkeye]

im gonna do the oppisite... im gonna wait till the new non levis designs come out before i even think about buyng. im serious... thats the real way to show you support these brands.

+1, I cant wait!

[fre-co]

I was joking. I would need to remortgage my house before stocking up on denim.

I have plans to be in Japan in April next year. If the new designs are around I will have a look. If the old ones are still hanging about I would probably try to get some.

[jiomitori]

im gonna do the oppisite... im gonna wait till the new non levis designs come out before i even think about buyng. im serious... thats the real way to show you support these brands.

But... but...

What if I want to wear a pair of SD103's in five years? Plus I need to buy a few sizes in case my body changes.

[fre-co]

Indeed. 3 pairs in each size, of each cut I think. Just in case.

[Paulo]

I kinda like my non levis jeans with the red tab. The last pair of jeans i got were some evisu from take5 and it had the tab. I cant stand places in london like selfridges who cut out the red tabs on jeans. I was there the other week and all the japanese evisu had the tabs cut out with a stanly knife and every single jean had been cut along with it as well leaving a nice hole next to your pocket on £300/$600 jeans. . .

I wonder what all this levis crap is going to do to prices. I might actually buy a couple of pairs of jeans now that this has happened even though i have like 3 i still want to wear...

Also ive noticed that while evisu have the red tabs Yamane jeans dont. Not a single one in their store had. I wonder if this is to keep any problems from levis away.

[blm14]

im gonna do the oppisite... im gonna wait till the new non levis designs come out before i even think about buyng. im serious... thats the real way to show you support these brands.

I've been saying this all along: Adhering to old designs solely because they predate current ones isn't a good reason to only stick to the old designs. This will force these small companies to come up with new ideas, which is a good thing!

[jayrock]

I personally think the Skull dagger is way more badass than any little red tab.

I'm sure all these companies can do just fine coming up with their own gimmicks. Then they can start ripping each other off (not that I support Levi's claim, Imjussayin').

[theetruscan]

I believe, in answer to the question about still selling Arcs and Tabs in Japan, that Levi's does not have a copyright or the Japanese equivalent for these under Japanese law. How this is the case with the . . . Madrid? Agreement? Accord? Whatever I really don't know, but I'm not a lawyer nor a law student.

[PG2G]

This is good news, as long as the companies can keep on their feet. I don't really give a shit about repros, and I don't think the majority of the forum does either (just look at what's popular...).

[poly800rock]

This is good news, as long as the companies can keep on their feet. I don't really give a shit about repros, and I don't think the majority of the forum does either (just look at what's popular...).

great point. the only actual repro that is remotely popular is the 811s. everything else is dior, samurai, and apc's

[headtowall]

I like repro details, but don't find repro cuts terribly flattering in general. Furthermore, I prefer something on the pockets, but it doesn't necessarily have to be arcs and tabs.

Levi's actions really aren't going to prompt me to start buying Levi's again. They'd have to put out a product I'm interested in for that to happen. I think the whole situation is pretty dumb. Tabs and arcs, I'll give them that. 5 pocket pants, not really.

[Raijin-Fujin]

I think that Levis has a fairly strong case for the arcs and tabs as they constitute a logo of sorts. As for cuts/fits, I'm not sure they can do much about it, that is not to say a pattern cannot be copywrited/trademarked as Gap has in fact filed patents for its jean patterns. As far as I know Levis never filed a patent on those vintage cuts and I don't think you can go back a file retro-active one now that other prior arts exist (prior to the patent filing not the originals). I'm not a lawyer or even close but just my thought on it.

[homi29]

i agree with arc ripoffs, but some of the ones they're sueing aren't even that similar

that being said, i dont think anyone should have a monopoly on using a tab as long as its not red, and has different fonts/typeface etc

[indigo_junkie]

that being said, i dont think anyone should have a monopoly on using a tab as long as its not red, and has different fonts/typeface etc

I absolutely agree. For Levis to sue for against any colour tab is just unfair. Why don't they sue everyone over the use of blue denim? Why don't they sue everyone on the use of yellow stitching (yes, I know it's a dumb argument, because it's most likely Levis came up with using the tab first, but you don't see the company that first used a zipper fly instead of buttons suing everyone else?) I don't think anyone seeing a green tab on a pair of SCs or a japan flag tab on a pair of SDAs is going to mistake that jean for Levis. the red tab is iconic, other colour tabs are a novelty.

Unlike the majority, I like anti-fit, diaper-ass, repro cuts. I haven't bought too many of them, because I always thought they'd be around. I'm not in a good enough financial situation to just panic buy all these jeans. I'll most likely continue to buy my one pair every 2 months or so, whether repro jeans are still around or not. If I miss out, guess I'll just live with the repros I've already got.

[Charlie Delta]

We're falling back into the old discussion again, but I guess that's because there aren't that many new developments to talk about.

So while we're at it, I do think that Levi's has the right to have monopoly on the tab, atleast in that place, while I find "any piece of fabric between a pocket and the jeans" a bit far fetched, I think the should be allowed to alteast defend the placement, regardless of the colour. As has been said before, they have orange tabs, silver tabs etc.

The tab was actually invented to differentiate their product from that of others, when they lost their sole right to use rivets.

The red tab is regarded as one of the strongest brand recognition things in the clothing industrie.

Levis has the right to claim that as their own, as it was not invented as a product development but only for the purpose of branding. The only purpose the red tab has is to set Levi's jeans aside from other jeans.

It doesn't matter that these "repro"brands are doing it to "honour" the Levi's of days long gone. However much we (me included) love it.

I understand that the red tab (or any tab for that matter) by now is being considered as a quintessential part of jeans (especially around these parts), something that's just there, just like for example the watch pocket, but in fact it isn't.

Imagine a "repro shoe brand" starting to use a variation of the swoosh all of the sudden, because, "well, it's been around for so long now, it should be considered public domain, and besides we're only honouring old Nike's"

[Cameland]

Totally agree Cotton!

[indigo_junkie]

Imagine a "repro shoe brand" starting to use a variation of the swoosh all of the sudden, because, "well, it's been around for so long now, it should be considered public domain, and besides we're only honouring old Nike's"

I'd think of it as okay, if it was at least 50 years since the swoosh was trademarked (I think it's been about 30 something years now hasn't it?), and the company in question made the repro better than repros made by Nike (so it's not like a fake Rolex weakening the brand). In this instance (and it's been mentioned before) Nike would probably benefit from just licensing the swoosh to this company, since obviously, it can't come up with a decent repro on their own. The company in question can only improve the brand.

[tweeds]

^^ it's funny Duck's talking about repro sneakers...

i love the warehouse reproductions

PF flyers

adidas

[corter]

i think it's a little different than the swoosh though, that's a logo. i think it'd be more like nike saying "we put our logo on a hang tag on all of our shirts, so no one else can have hang tags on their shirts, regardless of the color or shape or brand". to me the tag is more of a concept then an actual levi's specific thing. it's just a way to get their name on the outside of the jeans, like advertising, and i dont know how much of that they should be allowed to keep to themselves.

[Charlie Delta]

indigo j: what you are saying makes sense in a way, main thing is that with a license the brand being reproed actually gives permission. Levi's never did that.

Tweeds: interesting, I really didn't think about those when writing that, hmmm?......

corter: I disagree with you here, I do think the red tab is a logo, maybe not in the traditional way. Also the comparrison with a hang tag would be correct if Nike (in your example) would've invented the hang tag, then they would have all rights to prevent other from using it aswell. Levi's did invent the red tab.

Think of it like this, if you see a pair of jeans with a blank red tab, without being aware that such a thing as "repro brands" exist, first thing to come to your mind would be Levi's. They can, and have put the tab on anything and in that way used it as a logo.

On a completely different note, funny is that I so far recieved 2 neg reps for this thread.

[wEstSidE]

doesn't bape make repro AF1s???

[jubei]

I read somewhere ( I think Complex?) that because of the construction, BAPE can somehow get away with making repro AF1s...something to do with the air midsole.

and for some reason, I like those repro Adidas better than those repro PF Flyers (maybe because I got PF Flyers for like $20 )

[wEstSidE]

nikes patent ran out for "AIR" technology 10 years ago.

what about pro keds? how do they make repro af1s?

the answer is that cluthin design isn't trademark/patentable unless you have a LOGO or INVENTION (respectively). did nike invent something for the af1? what trademarks are on the product? if i duno...Hundreds(?) wanted to they could make fake af1s with a different logo and name as long as they didn't infringe on any IP...perhaps they don't have enough money to fend off legal threats though. in the same vein, if a denims company really wanted to stick it to levi's they could supply red tabs and thread OUTSIDE of the denims (not between two pieces of fabric), which could be assembled however the buyer wished.

[gimmegimme]

Sometimes trademarks are more broad than just an actual logo or catchphrase. Adidas has trademarks for "thre representation of 3 stripes", so even if your product's three stripes don't look exactly like theirs, they still have a legal argument against you.

On another note Levi's also has trademarks for other back pocket stitching designs (these are actual trademarks):

[wEstSidE]

nike's trademark is the swoosh, jumpman, and nike air.

notice how bapestas say "sta" and not "air"? even if they're using nike's air technology they can just call it "air sta-bilization" or soemthing...

[gimmegimme]

Might give everyone a better idea of how Levi's is going after companies who's back pockets don't look like their traditional design. Those designs could easily be placed on another of Levi's brands, and still be registered with Levi's as the registrant.

[Guest stuckinutah]

^^ it's funny Duck's talking about repro sneakers...

i love the warehouse reproductions

PF flyers

adidas

those kick ass

[indigo_junkie]

On another note Levi's also has trademarks for other back pocket stitching designs (these are actual trademarks):

So Levis is going to trademark every artuate and stitch variation in an attempt to stop anyone using any kind stitiching on the backpocket? I guess they certainly have enough money, though they could spend that money on something a bit more constructive like, I don't know, designing better jeans and sourcing better denim. bleh.

I agree with Westside. Denim companies could supply a tab so that people can attach it at home. Make the tab a part of the flasher or something. Nothing illegal about modifying your jeans when you get them.

[gimmegimme]

An important thing to remember about trademarks is that they have to be actively used in order to keep them valid and in good standing.

If, for example, Levi's went after someone for using something confusingly similar to one of those designs, the first thing to other party would do is investigate use. Otherwise they have no argument, and in most countries there are procedures to expunge (get rid of) someone's trademark if they aren't using it.

The idea behind having protection over your designs and ideas is that you have to have both thought of the idea yourself, and use it for the purpose to branding your product. Otherwise you'd fall into the realm of something like domain names, where cybersquatters hord as many sites as they can, just so no one else can have them, or to make a profit off of someone's tardiness.

[gimmegimme]

Some more examples on trademarks that Levi's owns (or owned) in the US;

-the term "TYPE 1" for jackets/shirts

-backpockets with a transparent window in the them

-a tab sewn onto a shirt's breast pocket

-two green vertical-stitched bartacks on the coin pocket of a pair of pants

-the term "shrink-to-fit"

-an oilcloth ticket attached to the backpocket of a pair of pants

-their standard arcutate, but applied with paint

-the term "saddleman"