Urban Outfitters Found Liable for Copyright Infringement
Get Legal Help Today
Secured with SHA-256 Encryption
UPDATED: Jul 16, 2021
It’s all about you. We want to help you make the right legal decisions.
We strive to help you make confident insurance and legal decisions. Finding trusted and reliable insurance quotes and legal advice should be easy. This doesn’t influence our content. Our opinions are our own.
Editorial Guidelines: We are a free online resource for anyone interested in learning more about legal topics and insurance. Our goal is to be an objective, third-party resource for everything legal and insurance related. We update our site regularly, and all content is reviewed by experts.
Unicolors is a “textile converter” that creates, buys, or licenses rights to graphic artworks that it uses in textile designs.
Unicolors contended that a dress sold by the Urban Outfitters subsidiary Free People used a palm-leaf design that was very similar to a Unicolors design.
Unicolors sent Urban’s lawyer a cease-and-desist letter, then filed suit.
As California Apparel News reports, a jury awarded Unicolors $164,000 in its suit against Urban Outfitters in 2015. The jury found that Urban had willfully infringed the Unicolors copyright.
As the court noted,
A plaintiff must show “copying” of a protected work to prove copyright infringement.If there is no direct evidence of copying, a plaintiff may prove this element through circumstantial evidence that (1) the defendant had access to the copyrighted work prior to the creation of defendant’s work and (2) there is substantial similarity of the general ideas and expression between the copyrighted work and the defendant’s work.
Unicolors could not prove directly that Urban had access to its fabric. However, Unicolors had sold 14,000 yards of the fabric during the three years before the Urban dress was created. The lower court said that wasn’t sufficient to show that the design was “widely disseminated.”
The district court focused on whether the designs were “strikingly similar,” and concluded that they were:
Looking at two designs as a whole, the arrangements, shapes and details of all the floral or feather motifs are almost exactly the same.
The jury also found that the infringement was willful:
At trial, Unicolors presented evidence that Urban adopted a reckless policy with regard to copyright infringement because it made no attempt to check or inquire into whether any of the designs it used in its apparel were subject to copyright protections.
How Can Retailers Avoid Lawsuits?
In another related lawsuit, Unicolors also sued more than 60 retailers that carried the same Free People dress.
Unicolors has been involved in at least 90 copyright infringement lawsuits since 2005. Most such cases settle out of court, so it’s unusual that the Urban Outfitters case not only went to trial but was appealed all the way to the Ninth Circuit.
Fabric designs, like other woks of authorship, can be registered with the US Copyright Office. However, it can be difficult to search for registered designs without knowing the precise name or registration number of the design.
As California Apparel News suggests, manufacturers and retailers can try to protect themselves against lawsuits by getting an indemnity agreement from the fabric converter or supplier, covering third-party copyright infringement claims.
Urban Outfitters is known for its sometimes-controversial design choices.
As The Week notes,
Over the years, Urban Outfitters, a store aimed at young hipsters and owned by big-time conservative donor Richard Hayne, has managed to offend blacks, Jews, Native Americans, liberals, conservatives, and eating-disorder awareness groups, among others.