They say imitation is the sincerest form...

[iluvmybags]

does anyone remember Besso & Lush Handbags? they made all these bags that were made to look EXACTLY like designer bags, w/o the labels and logos -- Besso had a line of bags that looked exactly like MJs collection bags -- I actually found a Sophia styled one at TJMaxx a long time ago for around $75 -- everything about the bag was spot on perfect, except it had no nameplate inside nor suede lining (and it was made of very soft leather) -- they also made "Motorcycle" bags that looked exactly like Balenciaga -- they even had the tassels and mirror attached -- I remember when I couldn't afford designer bags, and I had actually bought one of the MJ look-a-like bags (I ended up returning it) -- I couldn't believe how perfect every aspect of the bag was -- it was the same size, pockets, padlocks -- three sections -- all that was missing was MJs name and the Made in Italy label -- I don't mind these types of bags that much -- if someone really LOVEs the look of MJ and/or Balenciaga, I'd much rather see them spend $50-100 for one of these leather look-a-likes then one of the $20 fake ones from the street corners -- I've always said that if it's the look and style that you love but cannot afford, then one of these look-a-like bags should make you happy -- unless you want everyone around you to THINK you bought the real thing -- that's the ONLY reason to buy a fake -- you know it's not real, but no one else knows for sure -- you're not fooling yourself but everyone around you -- if you didn't care, one of the look-a-like bags should make you just as happy

 

[iluvmybags]

Look familiar???

Lush "Chain Quilted Snap"
$169.99
(yes, its made of leather)

 

[iluvmybags]

Quilted Ribbon Push Lock
$159.99

 

[iluvmybags]

I know that these ^^ really p1ss people off -- for me, they don't bother me -- I bought one once upon a time -- if you like the look of the stam, but cannot afford it, I would rather see you carry one of these, then one of the fake ones that support illegal activities!!

 

[jun3machina]

but then you're walking the fine line of illegally produced fakes, and artistic and creative license being totally ripped off...

 

[iluvmybags]

but then you're walking the fine line of illegally produced fakes, and artistic and creative license being totally ripped off...

I'm actually surprised that they're still selling the stam, since that style's been TM'd -- but most styles aren't -- I don't consider these illegally produced bags at all -- no labels, no names, no misrepresentations -- they state exactly what you're getting and there's no surprises -- (they don't use the designer's style names either) -- I really don't have a problem with these types of bags -- as long as the sellers and manufacturers are straight up & honest about what you're getting -- it's when they start plastering the designer's name, hangtags and labels when I really start getting mad -- those are clearly counterfeits which I am 100% against

 

[chipmunkvoice]

LOL I have been thinking about starting a thread just like this, but for another designer... here's my contribution to MJ:

MJ Hutton clutch:

And Aussie brand Witchery's version:

Ugh witchery -__-"" They did a copy of MANY MJ bags and one of them was the Dr. Q Groovee in black and a saddle. I have the chocolate Groovee and walked into witchery and the SA was like "Hey! you have a copy of our witchery bag! *smiles*" ............................ -___-"
witchery sells them at ridiculous prices too. Their "Groovee" was $200 !!! =__=!!!

 

[jun3machina]

I'm actually surprised that they're still selling the stam, since that style's been TM'd -- but most styles aren't -- I don't consider these illegally produced bags at all -- no labels, no names, no misrepresentations -- they state exactly what you're getting and there's no surprises -- (they don't use the designer's style names either) -- I really don't have a problem with these types of bags -- as long as the sellers and manufacturers are straight up & honest about what you're getting -- it's when they start plastering the designer's name, hangtags and labels when I really start getting mad -- those are clearly counterfeits which I am 100% against

yes, designers only recently got the TM enacted to save their designs legally. i didn't mean the lush stuff is produced illegally, i meant that when you compare a fake knockoff bought from a street vendor, a lot of the time the logo's are off one way or another, so they're not replica's exactly...but close enough. like for fake fendi's, sometimes they'll put "f's" and "L's" together, instead of double "f's"....and in a way, just because those lush bags don't have a 'marc jacobs thing put on them, doesn't mean they are any better than the china-made fakes.

I've heard of back door factories for major designers in china letting a certain # of factory rejects come out, and then letting a fake factory finish them up and they sell them as replica bags.

and some of the "in the style of" bags, such as those produced by lush, sell only based on the fact that the thousand dollar version is out on the market and on celebs arms and in the magazines.

I started this thread, because with the success and popularity of the "it" bags from the 1990's til now, it seems like smaller companies no longer putting creativity into their designs and it's more important for them to look like something that most people cant afford, because they know to the unsuspecting buyer, they'll make $$ off the trend. making a companies $$ off of borrowing a popular design, to me, as an artist is a bit upsetting. I'd much rather see a new designer come out with something brand new and sell just a few than mass produce a cheaply made "inspired-but-not-replicated-to-a-tee" bag...but that's just MHO

 

[iluvmybags]

I started this thread, because with the success and popularity of the "it" bags from the 1990's til now, it seems like smaller companies no longer putting creativity into their designs and it's more important for them to look like something that most people cant afford, because they know to the unsuspecting buyer, they'll make $$ off the trend. making a companies $$ off of borrowing a popular design, to me, as an artist is a bit upsetting. I'd much rather see a new designer come out with something brand new and sell just a few than mass produce a cheaply made "inspired-but-not-replicated-to-a-tee" bag...but that's just MHO

you hit the nail on the head in that last paragraph -- so much emphasis is put on style and fashion these days and mimicking your fav celeb's style that it's almost like the industry is encouraging lower priced designers to come up with look-a-like and replicas -- a perfect example is people mag's website -- they have an entire section dedicated to celeb's style and at the very bottom they tell you where to get the real thing and where you can "Steal this Style" -- the internet is loaded with similar sites -- "Copy this Look" "You can look like Sienna" "Olsen Twin's Look" -- nothing is unique anymore -- You hold up two outfits for a teenager today -- one that's completely original and has never been seen and one that looks like something that one of the Olsen twins wore last week and which one do you think they're going to choose? The Olsen's outfit, of course -- Consumers (especially teenagers) are constantly being shown "what's hot, what's not" -- it never used to be like this. When I was a teenager, we didn't have magazine columns dedicated to who was wearing what -- if you saw something you liked, you bought it & wore it -- of course, there's always been a hint of "copying" involved with fashion -- dating back to the 50s & 60s with Audrey Hepburn & Jackie O -- but it wasn't emphasized as much as it is today

I think that's why we see so many of these lower priced designers copying the higher priced lines -- they know that young women today don't want individuality -- they want to look like MaryKate, Ashley, Milley, Sienna, etc -- so they take what they see on the runways and make it their own & hope that their lower price point will bring in the sales --

 

[jun3machina]

you hit the nail on the head in that last paragraph -- so much emphasis is put on style and fashion these days and mimicking your fav celeb's style that it's almost like the industry is encouraging lower priced designers to come up with look-a-like and replicas -- a perfect example is people mag's website -- they have an entire section dedicated to celeb's style and at the very bottom they tell you where to get the real thing and where you can "Steal this Style" -- the internet is loaded with similar sites -- "Copy this Look" "You can look like Sienna" "Olsen Twin's Look" -- nothing is unique anymore -- You hold up two outfits for a teenager today -- one that's completely original and has never been seen and one that looks like something that one of the Olsen twins wore last week and which one do you think they're going to choose? The Olsen's outfit, of course -- Consumers (especially teenagers) are constantly being shown "what's hot, what's not" -- it never used to be like this. When I was a teenager, we didn't have magazine columns dedicated to who was wearing what -- if you saw something you liked, you bought it & wore it -- of course, there's always been a hint of "copying" involved with fashion -- dating back to the 50s & 60s with Audrey Hepburn & Jackie O -- but it wasn't emphasized as much as it is today

I think that's why we see so many of these lower priced designers copying the higher priced lines -- they know that young women today don't want individuality -- they want to look like MaryKate, Ashley, Milley, Sienna, etc -- so they take what they see on the runways and make it their own & hope that their lower price point will bring in the sales --

yah...it's really quite sad. the point you made with jackie O and audrey too, is right on! but also i think both those women (and others popular at the time) were also emanating more than just style: they were graceful, lady like, independent, and refined. They had a personality associated with the clothes, and I think THAT made them stylish. Sad to say, many popular role models today are as transparent and hollow as the glass houses they build and reside in. It's really quite sad IMHO. And that's why i really respect and admire women from the past. They had something there that was truly admirable, and that was portrayed visually as "style".

 

[I love HH!]

hayden harnetts version ... the hardware looks A LOT like MJ's Hinge jewelry:

I think you are actually missing the fact that both MJ and HH were referencing Art Deco enamels. The MJ was no more unique than the HH, and it's not clear to me that HH was in any way referencing or ripping off THIS design in particular. Just sayin'. MJ did not invent the wheel.

 

[I love HH!]

you hit the nail on the head in that last paragraph -- so much emphasis is put on style and fashion these days and mimicking your fav celeb's style that it's almost like the industry is encouraging lower priced designers to come up with look-a-like and replicas -- a perfect example is people mag's website -- they have an entire section dedicated to celeb's style and at the very bottom they tell you where to get the real thing and where you can "Steal this Style" -- the internet is loaded with similar sites -- "Copy this Look" "You can look like Sienna" "Olsen Twin's Look" -- nothing is unique anymore -- You hold up two outfits for a teenager today -- one that's completely original and has never been seen and one that looks like something that one of the Olsen twins wore last week and which one do you think they're going to choose? The Olsen's outfit, of course -- Consumers (especially teenagers) are constantly being shown "what's hot, what's not" -- it never used to be like this. When I was a teenager, we didn't have magazine columns dedicated to who was wearing what -- if you saw something you liked, you bought it & wore it -- of course, there's always been a hint of "copying" involved with fashion -- dating back to the 50s & 60s with Audrey Hepburn & Jackie O -- but it wasn't emphasized as much as it is today

I think that's why we see so many of these lower priced designers copying the higher priced lines -- they know that young women today don't want individuality -- they want to look like MaryKate, Ashley, Milley, Sienna, etc -- so they take what they see on the runways and make it their own & hope that their lower price point will bring in the sales --

Hasn't fashion always been this way? Lower-end designers see what is coming down the runways, and make their own versions. This is nothing new. The only difference is that today, the turnaround is much faster since everything can be manufactured in China and shipped back within 2 weeks, perhaps...but there has always been this trickle-down effect in fashion. Even if women weren't aware of it, the bags or shoes or skirts they were buying were influenced by high fashion, perhaps one or two or five seasons ago. There is always influence and borrowing; and who's to say that's wrong? I personally love watching fashions cycle in and out, and seeing how high-fashion trends trickle down to the masses. Blogs like fashionista are great about covering some of the most blatant rip-offs of high fashion.

Of course, the rip-off never approaches the greatness of the original, because it never can, and people who buy that stuff will probably never be able to experience the luxury of having a truly well-made and thoughtfully designed piece. But give us poor folks the happiness of being able to copy high fashion on a budget, and count yourself lucky to be able to afford the orginal!

 

[i_wona]

Ugh witchery -__-"" They did a copy of MANY MJ bags and one of them was the Dr. Q Groovee in black and a saddle. I have the chocolate Groovee and walked into witchery and the SA was like "Hey! you have a copy of our witchery bag! *smiles*" ............................ -___-"
witchery sells them at ridiculous prices too. Their "Groovee" was $200 !!! =__=!!!

LOL I remember the "Witchery Groovee"! In fact, I think you can still get it online!

Yeah Witchery are pretty terrible - they did Chloe like crazy a few seasons ago I'm a Chloe girl at heart) and they currently have a few Chloe-like designs instore... the Hutton clutch was beyond "inspired" though - more like a downright copy LOL

 

[Luna]

I think you are actually missing the fact that both MJ and HH were referencing Art Deco enamels. The MJ was no more unique than the HH, and it's not clear to me that HH was in any way referencing or ripping off THIS design in particular. Just sayin'. MJ did not invent the wheel.

I'm not missing any fact. You'd have to be daft, dumb, and blind to not realize that both are simply art deco pieces.

didn't claim he invented any wheel. but neither did HH.

The thread is referencing styles of other designers to MJ. and from what I'm reading, a similar thread took place in the Hermes subforum comparing MJ's design to Hermes...

it works both up and down the scale of designers.

All *I* was pointing out is this definite similarities between the jewelry and the hardware on the HH.

Just sayin'.

 

[tadpolenyc]

I think you are actually missing the fact that both MJ and HH were referencing Art Deco enamels. The MJ was no more unique than the HH, and it's not clear to me that HH was in any way referencing or ripping off THIS design in particular. Just sayin'. MJ did not invent the wheel.

i'd like to preface this by saying that no one here intends to insinuate that hayden-harnett is an inferior brand. while i agree that designers are influenced by other designers, there is a difference between referencing and just plain old unoriginality. true, mj didn't create art deco, but he did create an entire collection centered around the art deco movement. now, while the hh bag may not be a direct copy or knock-off of the mj paloma, they share striking similarities namely the shape, the size, the stud detailing on the straps, the strap drop length, and the positioning of the decoration. there's little that was altered in the hh interpretation.

anyone can slap an art deco enamel on a bag, but it's another thing to create a product similar enough that those familiar with fashion or the designer can look at it and instantly recognize from which season and design it originates from.

i don't find anything offensive or wrong about that. i support the ********ization of fashion, and i don't believe you should have to be affluent in order to own well-made things, but the current state of style is such that it's breeding emulation rather than innovation. young brooklyn-based fashion houses like hh should be doing more of the latter to establish themselves as a brand, and judging by their other designs, it isn't as if they aren't capable of original ideas. not that i think mj is truly original because he's not, but i don't believe anyone can say that he doesn't take the mundane and make it his own.