A thought on fakes

  1. We have been discussing the authentification of Paddys rather a lot lately on this forum and one thing has always bugged me. Why do fakes deliberately get it wrong? E.g. the upside-down keyhole or the edging on the leather in the same colour. To me, these are such obvious giveaways, but on the other hand, so easy for the counterfeiters to fix. I wonder if these tell-tale signs are actually done deliberately so that Chloe cannot sue them should they get caught. They can always claim they are making Chloe-inspired bags, rather than replicating the bag exactly. The counterfeiters can always claim that once they sell it to their distributors, there is no way of they can ensure whether the distributors claim authenticity. Of course, with the super fakes, this is another story altogether.

    What do you think?
     
  2. I was at the maul today, carrying my choco, and I ran into one of those
    mid-aisle booths. They were sell knock-off spy bags, paddies, etc.

    The gal thought I wanted one of the spy's at first so she started trying
    to sell me on it. DH was sooo amused :p

    Anyway, she explained where the Fendi logo would be if it were real.

    So what I wonder is, do the Fake Co folks think that getting one thing
    wrong will be it less of a copyright infringement CRIME?!?!? :confused1::cursing:
     
  3. I believe that they say that having one or two things different make it not an "exact copy" and give them some sort of loophole. Fortunately for us, it also makes it a little easier to spot them!
     
  4. It doesn't really save the fakers that they get a few details wrong or different IF they still infringe by putting the Chloe name on their crappy bags, and claim the bags are authentic Chloe bags. If they want to make a similar replica and label it and sell it accordingly, that is different.
     
  5. This is exactly what I've been wondering, usually when a time passes after some new bag's launch (like with paddy it was 2005) they fix the differencies in fakes and make them at least better - but they still have bright gold tone studs etc...? I'm sure they know they're wrong? But well for us it's a good thing as it seems there isn't a mirror image on the market! :biggrin:
     
  6. It would only be copyright infringement ONLY if the paddington was a patented design LOL.

    I think it would be a trademark infringement to copy the name exactly how Chloe or Fendi has it...but at the same time, they need to do the paperwork to get the name trademarked.


    I think for a fake to be more on point w/ a real, it'll cost them more money than necessary :shrugs:

    On Canal street in nyc, i see all kinds of fake chloe from far away.. it might not say chloe on the padlock, but the style is chloe, but w/ pleather... :yuck:

    I should take a picture of the fakes they sell and share one day LOL
     
  7. Come on people, think about it... Do you really think someone that sells fake bags will give you 2x back? It's easier for them to run with your 1x money...

    I know you are probably just joking but someone on this board might actually try it :idea:
     
  8. Yes, my comment was purely sarcastic Rocmit- sorry for any offense. :shame:
     
  9. Yea you're right rocmit - I hope no-one does what I said...!!!

    I just couln't resist to joke about it but you're right :s
     
  10. [​IMG]
     
  11. Wow... :amazed: Those are so awful...
     
  12. those plastic look-a-likes are just :throwup: