NEW YORK (AP) 鈥� Fashion 鈥渄upes,鈥� or less expensive versions of high-end clothing and other accessories, are just about everywhere these days. They're also drawing some businesses into legal battles.
In the latest example, on Friday, accusing the wholesale club operator of selling lower-priced duplicates of some of its popular athleisure apparel.
Across the retail industry, it鈥檚 far from a new phenomenon. But social media is pushing the culture of online dupe shopping to new heights as influencers direct their followers to where they can buy the knockoffs. Want a taste of Herm猫s' $1,000 fuzzy slippers? Target has a version for $15. Looking for a $2,800 price Bottega Veneta hobo bag? There鈥檚 a version for $99 on online clothing and accessories upstart Quince, which has become a go-to for fashionistas.
It's not even the first time Lululemon has encountered what it says are knockoffs of its clothing, which often carry steep price tags of over $100 each for leggings and sporty zip-ups. Without specifying additional sellers beyond Costco in Friday鈥檚 complaint, Lululemon noted that a handful companies have 鈥渞eplicated or copied鈥� its apparel to sell cheaper offerings 鈥� including those popularized online through hashtags like 鈥淟ululemonDupes鈥� and other social media platforms.
Dupes aren't new
For years, companies have rolled out a range of cheaper option for consumers to buy instead of pricey name-brands or designer labels 鈥� often through retailers' house or generic brands. Unlike more direct copies of the product with an unauthorized trademark or logo of a patented brand, 鈥減ure鈥� dupes that just resemble certain features are generally legitimate. They can even spark awareness of the original items.
But the rising frenzy for dupes, particularly in the fashion space, signals that many shoppers want a taste of luxury, but no longer want to pay for (or care about) getting the real thing.
Late last year, for example, discount chain Walmart created a buzz when it started selling a leather bag online that resembled Herm猫s鈥� coveted The $78 item 鈥� sold by Kamugo, which doesn鈥檛 appear to have its own website 鈥� was a fraction of the price of the original, which goes from $9,000 to hundreds of thousands of dollars on resale and auction sites. Influencers labeled the leather bag a 鈥渨irkin.鈥� Other suppliers including BESTSPR, YMTQ and Judy were listed on Walmart鈥檚 site selling similar totes.
While popular among shoppers, these kind of look-alikes can frustrate the targeted companies. Following the viral fame of the 鈥渨irkin,鈥� Herm猫s Executive Chairman Axel Dumas shared his annoyance, for example.
鈥淢aking a copy like this is quite detestable,鈥� Dumas said in a corporate earnings call in February. Still, he acknowledged that it was 鈥渜uite touching鈥� to see so many consumers want a bag with the Birkin style 鈥� and that 鈥渄ifference in quality鈥� was still evident, noting that nobody bought the dupe thinking it was from Herm猫s.
When dupes venture into uncertain legal territory
Alexandra Roberts, a professor of law and media at Northeastern University, said that 鈥渢he term 鈥榙upe鈥� itself doesn鈥檛 tell us much about legality," noting the word has also been used to describe more traditional counterfeits.
But overall, dupes can move into shaky legal territory, including copyright and trademark infringement, particularly if a dupe marketer makes false claims about the duplicate or the original.
鈥淲ith fashion, in particular, we鈥檙e going to get into some thorny questions," Roberts said. That includes what intellectual property rights exist and how enforceable they are, she explained, and whether there is actual infringement or if a product is just 鈥減ositioning itself as a less expensive alternative.鈥�
Often such disputes boil down trademark questions around consumer confusion or patented product designs. Several businesses have already put this to the test, but not always successfully.
In December, for example, Benefit lost a lawsuit in California over E.l.f.'s $6 Lash 鈥橬 Roll mascara, which is similar to Benefit鈥檚 $29 Roller Lash mascara. The judge鈥檚 decision was 鈥渁 resounding win for us,鈥� E.lf. CEO Tarang Amin previously told The Associated Press.
鈥淭he basic reality is we always put our E.l.f. twist on it,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 an E.l.f. product that鈥檚 a much better value.鈥�
Lululemon sues Costco
In its lawsuit, Lululemon argued that Costco had 鈥渦nlawfully traded鈥� on Lululemon鈥檚 reputation and that it was suing as part of wider intellectual property enforcement 鈥渄irected to retailers who have chosen to copy rather than compete.鈥�
Lululemon of several products, including its popular Scuba hoodies, Define jackets and ABC pants. Lululemon says one of the duplicates that Costco sells is the Hi-Tec Men鈥檚 Scuba Full Zip, with the lawsuit showing a screenshot image of Costco鈥檚 website showing the item priced at $19.97.
Roberts said she was 鈥渁 little skeptical鈥� of some of Lululemon's claims, noting that the design patents in particular could be hard to challenge. And she pointed to Lululemon's asserting common law trade dress over a 鈥渢riangle kind of shape in the crotch region鈥� of the ABC pants.
鈥淢y first reaction as a trademark expert is that looks pretty functional,鈥� she said, and functional matter is not protected under trademark law. 鈥淚 was just cracking up because that particular claim seemed really far-fetched to me. Those pants look really basic."
Still, Roberts noted that Lululemon had some plausible claims.
Lululemon alleges that Costco is known to use manufacturers of popular branded products for its private label Kirkland brand, although the companies involved don't clearly reveal that information to customers. Due to this, Lululemon claims some shoppers may believe that Kirkland-branded products are made by the authentic supplier of the 鈥渙riginal鈥� products.
Roberts said this could rule in Lululemon's favor as something that 鈥渨eighs toward consumer confusion.鈥� Still, she noted that most of the products Lululemon mentioned in its complaint weren't sold under the Kirkland brand, which could undermine the argument.
A message was left Tuesday seeking comment from Costco on the lawsuit.
Lululemon found itself in a similar dispute with Peloton in 2021, when it sued the exercise bike company over alleged 鈥渃opycat products鈥� in its then-new clothing lines. Two years later, the companies announced a that included Lululemon becoming the primary athletic apparel partner to Peloton.
鈥�-
AP Business Writer Michelle Chapman contributed to this report.
Wyatte Grantham-philips And Anne D'innocenzio, The Associated Press
