Fake Fashion Products: Pending Legislation Aims to Quash the Success of Stores like Forever 21 and H&M

Retail stores like H&M and Forever 21 have risen to quick success because they ride along the backs of the trends. Fast fashion is the name of the game when it comes to what these types of stores sell because they are good at copying the real thing. Whether it be a Marc Jacobs bag or a Chloe dress, the fakes have sometimes gotten as good as the real thing - and they're even better because they're cheapier.

On any given day, a person can stroll down Los Angeles' famous Santee Alley and walk in any purse or accessories store to find some really good knock-off designer bags or jewelry. Some merchandise is obviously fake with labels like "Channel" (instead of Chanel) or patterns that look like a Louis Vuitton purse from afar (but upon closer inspection look nothing like the real thing).

Those are obvious fakes, but what about the pieces of merchandise that runs a close second to the real thing but may be is a little bit different in details like buttons or placements of a collar or draped piece of fabric? Should those come under just as much scrutiny?

According to the Federal Copyright Act of 1976, artwork such as brand labels or logos are protected. Thus, if another company or designer obviously copies those things, they can be sued. However, when it comes to a pattern, they are fair game for copycats. So, the question is whether patterns should be protected.

Diane Von Furstenberg and Hillary Rodham Clinton think so. The two have drafted a pending bill in the Senate which would cover everything in the Copyright Act of 1976, but also expand it to a product's likeness for three years.

If passed, this would mean stores such as Forever 21, ABS, Bebe and H&M that get their kicks and their sales from tailgating off of the designer world could be sued and sued some more. As it is Forever 21 has had 20 copyright or trademark lawsuits filed against it in just this past year alone.