Wednesday, 17 November 2010

RIDICULE AROUND RITA

Some time ago there were headlines over here, and smaller notices elsewhere, about Ivana Trump suing the Finnish fashion company IVANAhelsinki claiming the later was taking advantage of her name. This was when the IVANAhelsinki collection was presented at the New York fashion week. While many considered it a PR trick from Trump's side, it was considered plain idiocity over here : IVANAhelsinki was founded in the late nineties by Paola Ivana (yes, that's her name too) while Trump registered her name as a trade mark as late as 2002... And back then few even knew about any of the Trumps over here - and even fewer cared. I noticed that some of the non Finnish articles mentioning the case, while over all neutral, were wondering why someone would want to use the Ivana name anyhow as the thing is a bit "old and used already". (To be pointed out is that there seems to be several Ivana-named brands in NY already, like an Ivana Vodka for example). Which shows of bad research of those authors - apart from the facts already mentioned the thing with IVANA helsinki is that the brand of course has nothing to do with any other Ivana than the one designing the clothes, and does not really have any need nor desire to be associated with anything else than itself.

Well, I don't know how the case has continued as the news front has been silent so far. But yesterday a new case made the headlines (something I noticed already has been appearing in posts by many fellow Finnish blogs during the past day too); Adidas has demanded Minna Parikka to withdraw her Rita shoe from the market, claiming the three stripes are copied from the classic Adidas sneaker.

Minna has explained that the three stripes are the ribbons of the bows in front of the shoe, but she still chose to withdraw the boot as "a small entrepreneur stands little chance against a huge corporation". It seems her matching Mistress gloves are also no longer available.

Of course companies and trade marks should watch out for themselves and their copyrighted products and look (for example the Marimekko vs. D&G case was rather obvious), but not by being obsessive - or cocky. I think comparing a high heeled boot from a chick designer to a classic leisure sneaker is, well, ridiculous.

For me those striped boots resembles a covered version of some of her pumps with three or more straps. But never in a lifetime would I have thought of Adidas! What do you think?

17 comments:

tanja. said...

...I totally agree: that IS ridiculous! And so sad as these heels are really gorgeous! But as a matter of fact there are some companies that try to make some extra money with these things instead of just protecting their ideas and/or products against plagiarism. Remember the case of Jack Wolfskin against those DaWanda (and Etsy?) Users with their cute pink cat paws etc....

Dave Feucht said...

Totally agree with you - I hate how much companies and organizations go out of their way to "protect" what is "theirs" - like the Recording Industry Association of America suing an individual person for millions of dollars for downloading a handful of songs illegally. Because the recording industry is clearly hurting for money and needs to protect all their assets.

I think finally some people are starting to see that this is more destructive than anything, and that actually *more* money can be made by loosening up these tight restrictions a bit.

Like with anything, find a good middle ground. Don't let someone copy you explicitly, but don't go after someone who very clearly had their own idea that just in some vague, obscure way happens to be minutely similar to your product.

It would be like the Rolling Stones suing the Beatles for using the same guitar or something.

Arawn said...

Never would have thought of Adidas when looking at those shoes... I've heard about this matter, too, and considered it to be stupid. I think Minna Parikka is doing the right thing though. What she says is most likely true and she is so new that there's no point in using ones strength to fight some big company. She should focus on her own business and that's what she does.

Well, no need to buy anything from Adidas anymore... Not that I have anything from them anyway. :D

Elina said...

This is totally ridiculous. But I hope this mess will bring more attention to Minna Parikka and then some new customers...

Anonymous said...

i'd rather wear parikkas anyday than anything from adidas, ever. ivanahelsinki is wonderful. i hope paola suhonen gets to keep the name. ivana trump isn't originally ivana trump anyway.

Gina Americana said...

Obviously, Ivana Trump, Inc. & Adidas need to get over it!

Rhia said...

It is ridiculous. However, Adidas has the reputation of being extremely jealous about their precious three stripes. Adidas has filed law suits or other demands towards numerous companies over the years about using two, three or four stripes. Companies include also big names such as Ralph Lauren.
This has been widely discussed around blogs and has raised lots of emotions saying Adidas sucks and how can this even be possible? How is it possible that someone can get a trademark of three stripes.
Trademark issues are complicated every time. If any product has widely known, distinctive features, they can be interpreted as a trademark even though they haven't been trademarked. To get that kind of reputation takes years, or even decades. And to be honest, Adidas has that kind of charasteristics in their products, even though Adidas isn't the first thing in my mind when I see three stripes. And when company gets the first case and wins, it is pretty much impossible to reverse the process.

BlueMoonDame said...

I bet Adidas is just pissed that they didn't come up with this shoe design first. Sayin'

Taika said...

Itse tuohduin Ivanauutisesta niin että mainitsin miehellekin jota ei muoti voisi vähempää kiinnostaa. Jopa sekin oli sitä mieltä että naurettavaa...

Anonymous said...

I only can think of Adidas when I see three black stripes on light background, with or without bow. That's how they have brainwashed us.

Dunno what Parikka has been thinkin of designing them, wether it's wrong or not, but I wouldn't want my high heels to remind me of Adidas superstars...

roheline said...

Wow! That Ivana issue is totally ridiculous, and so is the claim that Adidas made against ms Parikka. Using 3 stripes is plagiarism? Really now??? It's just 3 stripes. I would never have thought of Adidas when looking at ms Parikka's shoes. It's amazing how paranoid people and companies can be. And those shoes are much cooler and better looking than anything that Adidas has ever released.

cakesandshakes said...

They are fab boots. Adidas are ridiculous, how can you copyright some lines??? I am going to copyright air tomorrow, then i can sue everyone and get rich hahahahaha!!! : )Poor, poor Minna, creator of such fabulous fancy footwear.

sueper said...

mmm, tricky - I kinda got a bit adidas-feeling - I don't think it has been done on purpose but some things just turn out looking a lot like each other, but I think it is just lame from adidas to make a lawsuit out of it - as if they have the same clientel?

hope505 said...

completely ridiculous! Adidas can succkk ittt!! Besides the "stripes" (?) Minna Parikka are obviously dress shoes while adidas are sport shoes...I see no similarity at. all.

Sandy De Luxe said...

I actually thought Adidas before I read the post. Thought it was a new shoe from the Missy Elliot collection.
Anyway I think it's kind of ridiculous that those big companies (or persons) can't live with that a few people (like me) maybe think one way until they find out otherwise. It's not like Minna Parikka shoes ever is sold in a store which would sell Adidas.
The name Ivana is even more stupid, it a name for christ sake, not a brand!

Clara Cupcakes said...

I would never have though Addias either. How ridiculous! I have seen more blatant copyright infringement than that and less has been done about it. So so silly! People are too sensitive!

Grande Mama said...

Actually, if you think about it, there are 4 stripes - one on top - which Adidas doesn't have in their garments. And as everybody with eyeballs in their head can see -> when the shoes are on you are more fixed on the ribbony stripes than just the stripes themselves. Boycot Adidas right now - go for Nike (the contestant) instead or some other sporting gear!