Following my post last week about Matalan’s shameless ripping off of Luella,  I was pretty amused when editor Cate forwarded me an email this week on much the same subject. Fashion site Goddiva.co.uk had been in touch with her to show off their latest ‘designer doubles’ featuring, yup you guessed it, more Luella rips.

I don’t want to rehash last week’s post but what I will say again is just how lazy this whole thing is. The fact that Goddiva exists purely to provide cheapo knock-offs of big name brands is incredibly depressing to me. The blurb of the press release states; “STOP PRESS: Goddiva.co.uk has designed stunning dresses inspired by the Luella and Balmain catwalk shows”. I don’t think they know the difference between the word ‘inspired’ and ‘copied’ do they? To me inspired goes something like this;

Designer shows computerised graphic-y floral dress on the catwalk —> hmm florals are back—> gonna research floral prints from some '50s wallpaper books —> omg that print is amazing! I will use it on my entire collection! 

We end up with a new product at the end, INSPIRED by the IDEA of florals, but not in any way COPYING the designer. Right?

When I was doing my fashion masters, I remember my tutor telling me that legally you only had to change five (I’m sure it’s five, someone shout if this is wrong) things about a garment or handbag or shoe or whatever for it to be OK by law. This can be something as small as changing the stitch length or making the button 2mm thicker or changing the colour of a zip. Changing five things that tiny can still easily result in a near identical dress, which is why we get crappy websites like Goddiva happening.

I read an interesting interview with legendary British designer John Rocha in yesterday’s Evening Standard, where he revealed that in his opinion the high street has rescued the British fashion industry.

"We don't have the distribution structure like France or Italy, where when the designs come through there are manufacturing people who are happy to liaise with you. Or like America, where there are proper partnerships - just go down Seventh Avenue and there are so many brands. 

"So it's the high street - Topshop and H&M - which is so important when it comes to sponsoring new talent. Karl Lagerfeld, Comme des Garçons and Stella did a collection with H&M. New Look partnered Giles Deacon. Debenhams has taken on Henry Holland. These days it's totally acceptable. In fact, if you don't do it, you're going to struggle."

A good point well made and what he nails is the fact that these stores are getting it right by working with the designers, rather than just copying them. It’s a struggle for a new designer to make a profit, so of course they’ll be willing to team up with a reputable high street chain to earn some cash and get their name known. Topshop partnering with young designers has proved to be a profitable and productive venture, with neither the shop or the designer suffering from the partnership.

It works in favour for the shopper too; you get designer gear (be it a diffusion of their catwalk line or something totally new) for a pr ice you can afford. Wouldn’t ou rather that than wearing something you know has been copied from a designer who went under because they couldn’t make a profit?

Working with young talent, or even established talent like John Rocha’s relationship with Debenhams is beneficial for all involved and promotes a much healthier attitude to accessible, designer ‘inspired’ fashion. Goddiva; you should be ashamed.