Eben’s problem with the fashion industry is two-fold: (1) women are “coerced” into accepting, even enjoying crappy clothes because they have no good quality alternatives; and (2) women’s clothing is made cheaply via sweat shops and other unethical practices. He suggested that we compel the fashion industry as a whole to produce better quality clothing for women, as it does with clothing for men and that we force the fashion industry to pay fair wages to its factory workers. While I fully support such endeavors, I feel that it is outside the scope of the copyright issue. Furthermore, although banning such a copyright would not fix the graver social problems of “thug pushing thug,” relatively poor quality of women’s clothing, or sweat shop businesses, I think that refusing to address the issue simply because it won’t fix the greatest problems is problematic.

If this is really a case of “thug pushing thug,” fashion copyrighting will do nothing for the betterment of society while inevitably hurting consumers. Society would not benefit because the licensing fees that the Houses collect from the copyists (who will pass the costs onto consumers) will not go to providing better quality clothing or providing fair wages and working conditions. Instead, copyrighting will limit consumers’ choices because they will have to pay more for the same crappy sweatshop-made clothes. Moreover, copyrighting will provide Houses with even more money to lobby for their current practices.

Surely, quality and labor issues need to be addressed. Perhaps legislation that impose a grading system and a high standard for merchandisable clothing will bring the quality of women’s clothes up to par with men’s clothing and legislation that does not allow sweatshop-made clothes to be imported/sold in the U.S. will ameliorate the labor issues. But these are outside the scope of the copyright problem at hand. Nonetheless, ignoring the copyright problem for this reason will ultimately harm more “innocent” people (as opposed to the “thugs”) and may indirectly empower Houses to continue their current practices.

-- ChristinaYoun - 20 May 2008

NOTE: I'm still in the process of revising.

-- ChristinaYoun - 20 May 2008