i think your points are very well made. the counterfeit bags seized in the US customs though are often out of sheer luck, and they likely seize just as many authentic items as real ones b/c the officers are not trained in every detail of every designer. i buy (authentic) items from Japan a lot and some are assessed customs charges and some are not. it's all very random in customs, just as airport security would be if you walk through with a replica bag. on any given day the US customs may seize packages that fall into column a/authentic or column b/replica, it's by chance. they can't, and don't, know what it's in every incoming package, although incoming shipments/large cargo/pallets are totally different and those are likely held to a different standard and perhaps assessed by someone who does have more knowledge of a brand. and it's like any other job, the more an agent comes in contact with a brand, the better they will become at spotting replicas. the government really only cares about large quanity shipments b/c that is a loss of revenue and obviously not "allowed," but they don't about a single package going to Iowa unless you happen to get unlucky and it's detained. i don't know how customs/security works in other countries but i find it odd that people would care about being stopped for a replica bag when there is little chance that the person detaining them would even know a fake from an authentic for many of the reasons you already illuminated. the replica bags come out even before the designer ones hit the stores so people within the company itself are selling the designs to replicators, and i often think the companies don;t care as much as consumers anyway. many years ago i purchased a replica chanel flap to see what differences it had to the real one, or how similar my own bag was to the replica. i think lots of women buy replicas to test the waters with a bag/designer, but hate to admit it b/c there is "shame" associated with the word replica.
What are the legal implications of carrying (not buying) a fake bag?
- Thread starter devilish_angel
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
I think this was incredibly interesting. It would explain all the Balenciaga City replicas swarming the market, that cost almost as much as the real bag. But most importantly and annoyingly, why Bal don't do anything about it...
I have to tell you though that Bottega Veneta are fast as lightning taking down replica sellers/sites. I know this from my own experience. I was looking for a BV bracelet that wasn't available on BV:s own site any longer. Found it on a BV "outlet" site. Using BV:s own photos. it all looked pretty legit but since I'm new to BV and they were using a Hotmail address
for contact I e-mailed BV if it really was their site. The same day that replica site was gone.
I appreciate your comments to my post and since you took the time to reply, I’d like to respond to your post. Do pardon me for being blunt, I simply prefer to be direct.
One does not make over $600 billion dollars per year on sheer luck. It takes sheer deliberation, planning, organization, strategy, PR and flawless execution to make that kind of money. Luck has nothing to do with it…. and there is nothing random about it.
Customs officers are not trained at all, no matter the claims to the contrary. In my observation and research on the replica and luxury goods industries I came across something interesting…each factory has a unique identifier that lets the seller know which factory made the item. Yet, according to the media, the people who make these bags are terrorists, use child labor, use the funds to support terrorist activity and are just the shadiest group of people that you will ever find. However, these “shady” people stand to be fined and incarcerated if caught. It stands to reason that if indeed they were who the media tells us they are that there would be no identifier in any case as such could be used as evidence against them in the event that they are caught - or could lead to them being caught. Thus, I have concluded that the identifier, or something similar to it is for customs. It is not there so that they can seize the parcels with the identifier but so that they can seize those without it.
Several things bring me to this conclusion. You cannot patent a shoe, a design, a color, a dress or a name (absent the branding, style, font, etc.). This can be easily seen by brands like Michael Michael Kors, Kate Spade, etc., who will often replicate bags by Chanel and Louis Vuitton right down to the last detail and put their own branding on it. In this regard, I guess you could say that the branding creates a sort of monopoly for the owner in that they have the exclusive right to profit from their branding. Yet, if I wanted to, I could hand make a Chanel classic jumbo flap, right down to the branding - and violate no law as long as I do not sell it - as a replica.
A few years ago there was a company called Oh Dear! who decided to make shoes with red bottoms. This sent Mr. Red Bottom into hysterics and he tried to put a patent on those red bottoms – but he was rebuffed.
Oh Dear! disappeared from the retail scene not long after. Pity...I really liked their shoes, they looked nothing like Mr. Red Bottoms and had a lovely, vintage appeal.
What this means is that once I create a logo/brand, and I patent it, no one can use that logo/brand OUTSIDE OF MY EXPRESS PERMISSION and those who do will face imprisonment or a fine. If a country falls outside the scope of the laws of my country, I can enter into a treaty or pact with that country and specify within that agreement that they enforce/uphold the laws of my country in this regard…to some degree.
But if I allow you to use my branding, you can do so without fear of incarceration…I can charge you for its use and I can stipulate exactly how it can be used.
I can stipulate exactly how it can be used.
The only counterfeit parcels that customs seizes are those who are using the branding without permission. Customs is a government agency and their authority is derived from statute. It is the only basis upon which they are authorized to act. They know how to identify replica parcels because they are trained to know what to look for in terms of indicia on the outside of the package and not the bag itself. The 99.9% of counterfeit goods in parcels that come through customs undisturbed are allowed to pass because they are identified as those who have permission to use the branding.
LVMH, Chanel, etc. are corporations. They constantly seek ways to decrease costs and increase revenue. They are not going to invest any time or energy to train customs personnel to authenticate purses, keychains, or any other item they sell. It is not in their interest to do so, nor does customs personnel have the time, energy or manpower to employ such. They would have to inspect EVERY SINGLE PARCEL that comes into the United States and they are not about to do that.
It is no coincidence that their sales representatives are not allowed to authenticate their products either.
An industry that commands over $600 billion dollars annually has the power to influence a lot of people – including government. Customs is not excluded.
Just look at the many persons on the web that offer authentication “services”. They are in no way affiliated with the brands that they claim to authenticate…yet they exist and people use them. They are considered legitimate by scores of people. They represent just one kind of business that a so-called “illegal” industry has spawned. And where people are profiting from it, they have absolutely no interest in its demise.
I assure you that they do, in fact, care about those “single” parcels. That single parcel shipping to Iowa represents a factory that does business on a large scale. They are selling to individuals…one at a time, yet simultaneously to many single individuals. That single parcel represents other single parcels…shipped to consumers on a global scale. Yes, they care..
They are equally as interested in larger shipments…but only those that do not have the requisite indicia that allows customs to pass them through and only because those without the indicia represent a loss of revenue.
It is interesting how there is always a bit of truth mixed in with the distortion of facts in the media. The sale of replica bags does cause the corporation who owns the branding to lose revenue. But only where they have not authorized the replicator to use their branding.
The employees and the ever illusive “people within the company”are not selling the designs to replicators. That is simply another distortion that was disseminated by the corporation via the media. What I am saying, but don’t really want to say is this:
The luxury goods industry is an expensive industry. In order to keep up its facade, it must keep up appearances. It must occupy prime retail space in in the most prestigious locations. It must redecorate those spaces every few years to keep up with the latest in design. Employee wages, executive salaries, transportation, materials, overhead, utilities, etc., all cost money. They are subject to labor laws, statutes, etc. They must pay taxes.
The replica industry is free from all of these hindrances. I have it on good authority that the factories are safe (in contrast, the factories that make the authentic goods are not) and child labor is not used. There are no shops to redecorate, no prime retail location costs, no overhead, no employee wages or over the top executive salaries, no celebrities to gift. And it is all tax free.
The fact of the matter is that most people are not going to shell out $500 - $50,000 for a handbag or luxury item, whatever the reason. There are only so many sales they are going to make. Celebrities do not count as they are used as mere advertising tools and get the bags for free (and most of them wouldn’t pay the high prices for these items anyway). Their businesses barely break even.
On the other hand, there are masses of people who like their product but cannot afford it or don’t want to pay the high prices they are asking. They know this because they deliberately created the “image” that they are peddling and they understand full well the effect that it has on both sides of the market.
There is, however, a rather large dilemma.
How do I, as a corporation, capture the market share of the masses, without offending my core customer, or rather, without my core customer ever figuring out what I am really up to?
I will let you decide what that means. But I will leave you with a statement I made in a previous post:
Replica bags are made mostly in China. So are "authentic" bags. Do you find this to be odd? Personally, I do not believe in coincidence. Now, I have studied the replica and the luxury goods industries. And the biggest complaint I have heard from those who buy replica's is why the factories who make them can't produce a replica that is exactly like the authentic.
The answer is not that they can't, but that they WON'T. The reason should be obvious.
One does not make over $600 billion dollars per year on sheer luck. It takes sheer deliberation, planning, organization, strategy, PR and flawless execution to make that kind of money. Luck has nothing to do with it…. and there is nothing random about it.
Customs officers are not trained at all, no matter the claims to the contrary. In my observation and research on the replica and luxury goods industries I came across something interesting…each factory has a unique identifier that lets the seller know which factory made the item. Yet, according to the media, the people who make these bags are terrorists, use child labor, use the funds to support terrorist activity and are just the shadiest group of people that you will ever find. However, these “shady” people stand to be fined and incarcerated if caught. It stands to reason that if indeed they were who the media tells us they are that there would be no identifier in any case as such could be used as evidence against them in the event that they are caught - or could lead to them being caught. Thus, I have concluded that the identifier, or something similar to it is for customs. It is not there so that they can seize the parcels with the identifier but so that they can seize those without it.
Several things bring me to this conclusion. You cannot patent a shoe, a design, a color, a dress or a name (absent the branding, style, font, etc.). This can be easily seen by brands like Michael Michael Kors, Kate Spade, etc., who will often replicate bags by Chanel and Louis Vuitton right down to the last detail and put their own branding on it. In this regard, I guess you could say that the branding creates a sort of monopoly for the owner in that they have the exclusive right to profit from their branding. Yet, if I wanted to, I could hand make a Chanel classic jumbo flap, right down to the branding - and violate no law as long as I do not sell it - as a replica.
A few years ago there was a company called Oh Dear! who decided to make shoes with red bottoms. This sent Mr. Red Bottom into hysterics and he tried to put a patent on those red bottoms – but he was rebuffed.
Oh Dear! disappeared from the retail scene not long after. Pity...I really liked their shoes, they looked nothing like Mr. Red Bottoms and had a lovely, vintage appeal.
What this means is that once I create a logo/brand, and I patent it, no one can use that logo/brand OUTSIDE OF MY EXPRESS PERMISSION and those who do will face imprisonment or a fine. If a country falls outside the scope of the laws of my country, I can enter into a treaty or pact with that country and specify within that agreement that they enforce/uphold the laws of my country in this regard…to some degree.
But if I allow you to use my branding, you can do so without fear of incarceration…I can charge you for its use and I can stipulate exactly how it can be used.
I can stipulate exactly how it can be used.
The only counterfeit parcels that customs seizes are those who are using the branding without permission. Customs is a government agency and their authority is derived from statute. It is the only basis upon which they are authorized to act. They know how to identify replica parcels because they are trained to know what to look for in terms of indicia on the outside of the package and not the bag itself. The 99.9% of counterfeit goods in parcels that come through customs undisturbed are allowed to pass because they are identified as those who have permission to use the branding.
LVMH, Chanel, etc. are corporations. They constantly seek ways to decrease costs and increase revenue. They are not going to invest any time or energy to train customs personnel to authenticate purses, keychains, or any other item they sell. It is not in their interest to do so, nor does customs personnel have the time, energy or manpower to employ such. They would have to inspect EVERY SINGLE PARCEL that comes into the United States and they are not about to do that.
It is no coincidence that their sales representatives are not allowed to authenticate their products either.
An industry that commands over $600 billion dollars annually has the power to influence a lot of people – including government. Customs is not excluded.
Just look at the many persons on the web that offer authentication “services”. They are in no way affiliated with the brands that they claim to authenticate…yet they exist and people use them. They are considered legitimate by scores of people. They represent just one kind of business that a so-called “illegal” industry has spawned. And where people are profiting from it, they have absolutely no interest in its demise.
I assure you that they do, in fact, care about those “single” parcels. That single parcel shipping to Iowa represents a factory that does business on a large scale. They are selling to individuals…one at a time, yet simultaneously to many single individuals. That single parcel represents other single parcels…shipped to consumers on a global scale. Yes, they care..
They are equally as interested in larger shipments…but only those that do not have the requisite indicia that allows customs to pass them through and only because those without the indicia represent a loss of revenue.
It is interesting how there is always a bit of truth mixed in with the distortion of facts in the media. The sale of replica bags does cause the corporation who owns the branding to lose revenue. But only where they have not authorized the replicator to use their branding.
The employees and the ever illusive “people within the company”are not selling the designs to replicators. That is simply another distortion that was disseminated by the corporation via the media. What I am saying, but don’t really want to say is this:
The luxury goods industry is an expensive industry. In order to keep up its facade, it must keep up appearances. It must occupy prime retail space in in the most prestigious locations. It must redecorate those spaces every few years to keep up with the latest in design. Employee wages, executive salaries, transportation, materials, overhead, utilities, etc., all cost money. They are subject to labor laws, statutes, etc. They must pay taxes.
The replica industry is free from all of these hindrances. I have it on good authority that the factories are safe (in contrast, the factories that make the authentic goods are not) and child labor is not used. There are no shops to redecorate, no prime retail location costs, no overhead, no employee wages or over the top executive salaries, no celebrities to gift. And it is all tax free.
The fact of the matter is that most people are not going to shell out $500 - $50,000 for a handbag or luxury item, whatever the reason. There are only so many sales they are going to make. Celebrities do not count as they are used as mere advertising tools and get the bags for free (and most of them wouldn’t pay the high prices for these items anyway). Their businesses barely break even.
On the other hand, there are masses of people who like their product but cannot afford it or don’t want to pay the high prices they are asking. They know this because they deliberately created the “image” that they are peddling and they understand full well the effect that it has on both sides of the market.
There is, however, a rather large dilemma.
How do I, as a corporation, capture the market share of the masses, without offending my core customer, or rather, without my core customer ever figuring out what I am really up to?
I will let you decide what that means. But I will leave you with a statement I made in a previous post:
Replica bags are made mostly in China. So are "authentic" bags. Do you find this to be odd? Personally, I do not believe in coincidence. Now, I have studied the replica and the luxury goods industries. And the biggest complaint I have heard from those who buy replica's is why the factories who make them can't produce a replica that is exactly like the authentic.
The answer is not that they can't, but that they WON'T. The reason should be obvious.
I think this was incredibly interesting. It would explain all the Balenciaga City replicas swarming the market, that cost almost as much as the real bag. But most importantly and annoyingly, why Bal don't do anything about it...
I have to tell you though that Bottega Veneta are fast as lightning taking down replica sellers/sites. I know this from my own experience. I was looking for a BV bracelet that wasn't available on BV:s own site any longer. Found it on a BV "outlet" site. Using BV:s own photos. it all looked pretty legit but since I'm new to BV and they were using a Hotmail address
Please see my last response prior to this one...and let me say that I don't doubt your experience...however....
The only people who can use the Balenciaga logo are those who are authorized to do so by Balenciaga. All others are shut down, put out of business, etc. In my previous post (which you quoted) I stated that those who practice deception in one area, will practice it in all other areas. I also stated that when you are talking about vast sums of money, as is the case here, those who benefit from it will go to ANY length to protect their interest...to keep from being "found out".
The replica industry is an industry that makes well over $600 billion dollars annually. I will say it again.
Over $600 billion dollars.
Now, with all of the media blather about the illegality (remember, it is only illegal to use the branding if you do not have the permission of the company and you sell the item (as a replica no less) and then keep in mind that when people lie like this there is always a measure of truth in it...) of counterfeit items, would it not look odd if no websites EVER got shut down? If no packages were ever seized by customs, if no one were ever prosecuted? If you reported a website and it remained on the web?
Of course it would. (Note, legitimate businesses often shut down and reappear under an entirely different moniker),
Do you think the corporations are not aware of this fact?
Of course they are.
Do you think that in some instances they are above creating FAKE replica websites and shutting them down to keep the charade going?
Of course they are not. If they employ deception in one area, they will employ it in all other areas.
Just look at the Purse Princess (there was a thread about her on this very forum at one time). She purchased a replica and sold it to recoup her losses and THE CORPORATION CAME AFTER HER. Why? Why did they come after this one woman? Does that not strike anyone as a complete waste of time given the amount of money that they (and their intelligence clowns in the media) claim they are losing every time a replica is sold?
$500 per hour legal fees do not change whether you go after one person or twenty.
Now, the issue here is not whether she is right or wrong, clearly she is wrong. However, a person selling ONE BAG does not represent an industry of so-called "criminals" who are raking in the dough in the billions. Why would Chanel go after this little tiny guppy, who, in all honesty was likely not even making a profit from the sale of her bag? Why go after one small soldier, who makes no profit, when you have an entire ARMY making billions off of your branding? And yet, between the government and the corporation....they seem unable to FIND and SHUT DOWN the illusive criminals they claim are robbing them....while simultaneously appearing to be doing "all they can" to obliterate the problem.....yet not making enough progress to put a dent in the gain experienced by these so-called criminals.
So either they are fools...or they think that we are. At over $600 billion dollars per annum, I'd say the latter is true.
There are many other things to consider and that have brought me to this conclusion. A working knowledge of the law is just one of them, or rather how the law REALLY works. It is a simple matter of knowing that there is a difference between legal and lawful and it is absolutely CRUCIAL that one knows the difference. It is not difficult for anyone to understand...and if you don't know the difference, I suggest learning it as quickly as you can.
[QUOTE="ccbaggirl89, post: 31762083, member: 517391"Ithe replica bags come out even before the designer ones hit the stores so people within the company itself are selling the designs to replicators, and i often think the companies don;t care as much as consumers anyway. many years ago i purchased a replica chanel flap to see what differences it had to the real one, or how similar my own bag was to the replica. i think lots of women buy replicas to test the waters with a bag/designer, but hate to admit it b/c there is "shame" associated with the word replica.[/QUOTE]
I somehow left this out of my earlier reply and thought it important enough to address it.
People in high positions often create the problem and then offer the solution...and sometimes the problem is feigned. The reason the replica bags are released sooner than the authentic, is so that the corporation can lay the blame upon the illusive "employee" selling the designs - thus successfully deflecting attention away from themselves, and lending credibility to their lie -but make no mistake...they created the lie and then they apprise the replicators when the authentic bags will be released so they will know when to release the replica. Problem solved.
Again either they are fools (are we to believe that they would allow their employees to continually sell their designs, year after year after year without launching an all out war to find out who these employees are? Would they not have protected themselves from this very thing by insisting that each employee privy to or responsible for the designs agree not to sell or otherwise disseminate their designs? I submit that they would have done so and would find and then sue the employee and would recoup their losses by forcing the employee to return every penny earned while working for them) or they think we are.
I somehow left this out of my earlier reply and thought it important enough to address it.
People in high positions often create the problem and then offer the solution...and sometimes the problem is feigned. The reason the replica bags are released sooner than the authentic, is so that the corporation can lay the blame upon the illusive "employee" selling the designs - thus successfully deflecting attention away from themselves, and lending credibility to their lie -but make no mistake...they created the lie and then they apprise the replicators when the authentic bags will be released so they will know when to release the replica. Problem solved.
Again either they are fools (are we to believe that they would allow their employees to continually sell their designs, year after year after year without launching an all out war to find out who these employees are? Would they not have protected themselves from this very thing by insisting that each employee privy to or responsible for the designs agree not to sell or otherwise disseminate their designs? I submit that they would have done so and would find and then sue the employee and would recoup their losses by forcing the employee to return every penny earned while working for them) or they think we are.
i'm sure a fair portion of designers are more than happy to see replications and probably do help them get to market because it helps them down the line. there have been lots of articles/profiles done on luxury shoppers and i think it was concluded that 50% of women who buy a replica will buy the real thing within 2-3 years. so the replica serves as a lead-in the designer anyway.
I don't know where you're getting your information or the purpose of your research into the fakes industry, but these two remarks are evidence of confusion on your part. First, corporations absolutely do protect (trademark) specific design features and not only logos and branding, by means of trade dress law.
Second, in suggesting that luxury bags and fakes alike come from China and isn't that fishy, you're grossly misrepresenting the location of many luxury goods, which really truly do get made in Italy, France, Spain, and the United States, as well as Belgium and elsewhere in Europe. (I'm not talking about the stuff that gets the "Made in Italy" label applied at the end of a multinational process.)
So...where are you going with your comments? Is this a slow windup to advocating for the fakes industry, and/or else declaring it's in cahoots with legitimate luxury houses?
Last edited:
Interesting thread, but some very odd ideas about what the various types of intellectual property are, and indeed, very little understanding of how IP law is not the same in every nation or state, despite international IP treaty agreements and cooperatives. Glad someone mentioned what a trademark is, perhaps someone should also mention copyright law. And I cannot stress enough: trademark and copyright laws differ from country to country! And, oftentimes, their enforcement even moreso!
In general, I do not think the average person who buys a counterfeit item at a stall in the street knows it is counterfeit. There are some people who are more attuned to brands, which one might be if one registers on this site, and then I'd ask why they'd bother spending money on something that doesn't come with the guarantees of the authentic merchandise instead of just buying an item that looks similar...
Anecdotally, I will say that I have family members who emigrated many decades to large metro western cities as young people. They'd seen commercials or perhaps their lovely professors--or someone of importance, I guess--wearing beautiful Rolex watches. They'd never seen the brand before in their lives, but thought them lovely enough to buy one if they ever saw it in a shop. Oh, but they didn't realize that people in these western countries do not sell such merchandise in street market shops, although this was completely common back home. Many of you may be surprised to realize that this is not naïveté--this was just an expectation borne of how commerce is and was done in a large percentage of the world.
I suspect many people are the same, unless they are specifically seeking out something with the name CHANEL, etc. emblazoned on it. I also doubt people coming into major airports are harassed for bags that mimic major designers. Shall we also rip the shoes off people if they look too much like Gucci's new loafers? I think protecting IP and people's designs is important, but insomuch as this is not about IP protection for consumer safety (aka it's not faking a child's carseat design--i.e., it's not risking someone's life) as much as it's about addressing the obsession with vanity at any cost, I think I can simply say...
It's not that serious.
In general, I do not think the average person who buys a counterfeit item at a stall in the street knows it is counterfeit. There are some people who are more attuned to brands, which one might be if one registers on this site, and then I'd ask why they'd bother spending money on something that doesn't come with the guarantees of the authentic merchandise instead of just buying an item that looks similar...
Anecdotally, I will say that I have family members who emigrated many decades to large metro western cities as young people. They'd seen commercials or perhaps their lovely professors--or someone of importance, I guess--wearing beautiful Rolex watches. They'd never seen the brand before in their lives, but thought them lovely enough to buy one if they ever saw it in a shop. Oh, but they didn't realize that people in these western countries do not sell such merchandise in street market shops, although this was completely common back home. Many of you may be surprised to realize that this is not naïveté--this was just an expectation borne of how commerce is and was done in a large percentage of the world.
I suspect many people are the same, unless they are specifically seeking out something with the name CHANEL, etc. emblazoned on it. I also doubt people coming into major airports are harassed for bags that mimic major designers. Shall we also rip the shoes off people if they look too much like Gucci's new loafers? I think protecting IP and people's designs is important, but insomuch as this is not about IP protection for consumer safety (aka it's not faking a child's carseat design--i.e., it's not risking someone's life) as much as it's about addressing the obsession with vanity at any cost, I think I can simply say...
It's not that serious.
legally the carrier of the fake designer is not held accountable. That individual could've purchased it without knowing. Even if he/she knew or was aware that it's fake that doesn't make that person liable. Its up to them if they want to hold a fake. I also think that police have bigger fish to fry, they're not going to waste their time confiscating fakes from people. they're going to spend that time and energy and resources into finding the sellers of these inauthentic handbags.
Hmmm. I have no insider knowledge at all but I have long thought luxury houses were in cahoots with Michael Kors. His designs are SUCH rip offs, why would they let him get away with it? I don't think they would unless they were getting a cut. I suspect these houses do have secret agreements with knockoff brands to get money out of the mass market. It's actually smart.
Last edited:
I think they have moles. They probably have unethical employees in the design house who are making money on the side by selling clothing and handbag designs to other design houses. Sometimes the knockoff shops or MK come out with a design months before the real designers, so you they are getting it from people on the inside. I browse the MK website sometimes not to buy but to see what the new designers will be coming out with because he always has them first. I don't know the exact names but MK had the Louis Vuitton world tour lookalike patch items a few months before they came out.
No...they don't have moles. What they do have is an elaborate, extremely sophisticated Public Relations strategy that is designed to deflect attention AWAY from themselves and their true activities and keep the focus somewhere else. Does anyone ever consider these things? Everyone is sitting on their high horse (I don't know you so I'm not speaking of you personally) looking down their noses at everyone else and failing to THINK about what is happening right in front of our eyes.
These people are billionaires...but that's not all they are. But suffice it to say that someone who has that kind of money has the power to influence people..a lot of people. And if, as I am saying, that the luxury goods industry is simply a front for their true business, the counterfeit goods industry (which brings in more money than their "legitimate" industry ever could) what lengths do you think they will go to in order to conceal it? Do you think they are above lying? Putting false information out into the public sector by means of magazines, books, radio and television...from media outlets that they also...own?
The truth of the matter is that they will go to any length to conceal it. Yet while many "attack" me (for lack of a better term atm) they fail to realize that I gain absolutely nothing but enemies by telling the truth.
Can you imagine the sheer uh...joy I must feel? I tell you, I couldn't be happier than I am right now what with all the questioning and name calling from people who have never conducted an ounce of research in their entire lives.
Listen. People will talk about law, they will bring up history, they will quote verbatim, the nonsense that is fed to them in the news, they will call me names, question me and my research while they know nothing about either and yet they will never think to ask the one question that would put them on the path to discovering what I wish I had NEVER discovered but am COMPELLED to tell:
WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE ARE RUNNING THE CORPORATIONS THAT NOW OWN THE MAJORITY OF LUXURY FASHION HOUSES IN THE WORLD?
I will give you a hint...they're not all serial killers like Ted Bundy although they DO have the capacity to be...
If there are any among you interested in knowing the truth...start there..everything else will just fall into place...
Last edited:
^Well that seems unnecessarily dramatic. I don't think it is nefarious, evil or even illegal for LVMH to have secret agreements with knock-off companies. If they are just selling the copyright/trademark, its their right to do that. These businesses are not really counterfeit, if that is true.
Clearly, you cannot read...I said nothing about secret agreements with knock-off companies. If you are going to reply to someone make sure that your comment is addressing what THEY SAID and not their response to what SOMEONE ELSE said...