Lululemon gets aggressive about lookalikes with Costco lawsuit
The items in question include hoodies, jackets and pants that have similar colors and names to the Lululemon products.
Lululemon is arguing that the products sold at Costco entirely replicate the design of their apparel, highlighting silhouettes, seamlines and accents trademarked by Lululemon in the visual comparisons provided to the court.
'As an innovation-led company that invests significantly in the research, development, and design of our products, we take the responsibility of protecting and enforcing our intellectual property rights very seriously and pursue the appropriate legal action when necessary,' a Lululemon spokesperson said in a statement.
Costco declined to comment. It has yet to file a response to Lululemon's lawsuit.
Lululemon pioneered yogawear, but it's facing more intense competition as lower-priced items become more widely available. That has contributed to slowing growth and a sagging stock price. The lawsuit shows the company is taking a more aggressive stance on the issue.
Social media has fueled the popularity of so-called 'dupes,' with TikTok hashtags providing a quick way for content creators to generate free marketing for lookalike products.
Brand loyalty has also declined as years of higher inflation has eroded some shoppers' purchasing power and cheaper alternatives hit the market.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
20 hours ago
- France 24
TikTok launches crowd-sourced debunking tool in US
Footnotes, a feature that the popular video-sharing app began testing in April, allows vetted users to suggest written context for content that might be wrong or misleading -- similar to Community Notes on Meta and X. "Footnotes draws on the collective knowledge of the TikTok community by allowing people to add relevant information to content," Adam Presser, the platform's head of operations and trust and safety, said in a blog post. "Starting today, US users in the Footnotes pilot program can start to write and rate footnotes on short videos, and our US community will begin to see the ones rated as helpful -- and rate them, too," he added. TikTok said nearly 80,000 US-based users, who have maintained an account for at least six months, have qualified as Footnotes contributors. The video-sharing app has some 170 million US users. TikTok said the feature will augment the platform's existing integrity measures such as labeling content that cannot be verified and partnering with fact-checking organizations, such as AFP, to assess the accuracy of posts on the platform. The crowd-sourced verification system was popularized by Elon Musk's platform X, but researchers have repeatedly questioned its effectiveness in combating falsehoods. Earlier this month, a study found more than 90 percent of X's Community Notes are never published, highlighting major limits in efficacy. The Digital Democracy Institute of the Americas (DDIA) study analyzed the entire public dataset of 1.76 million notes published by X between January 2021 and March 2025. TikTok cautioned it may take some time for a footnote to become public, as contributors get started and become more familiar with the feature. "The more footnotes get written and rated on different topics, the smarter and more effective the system becomes," Presser said. Tech platforms increasingly view the community-driven model as an alternative to professional fact-checking. Earlier this year, Meta ended its third-party fact-checking program in the United States, with chief executive Mark Zuckerberg saying it had led to "too much censorship." The decision was widely seen as an attempt to appease President Donald Trump, whose conservative base has long complained that fact-checking on tech platforms serves to curtail free speech and censor right-wing content. Professional fact-checkers vehemently reject the claim. As an alternative, Zuckerberg said Meta's platforms, Facebook and Instagram, would use "Community Notes." Studies have shown Community Notes can work to dispel some falsehoods, like vaccine misinformation, but researchers have long cautioned that it works best for topics where there is broad consensus.
Euronews
a day ago
- Euronews
Australia adds YouTube to social media ban for children under age 16
Australian teenagers under age 16 will be barred from making YouTube accounts, in an expansion of the country's world-first ban on social media for young people. The decision comes after the country's internet regulator asked the government to include YouTube in its ban on social media for under-16s last month. A previous decision had allowed YouTube to sidestep the policy, which will go into effect later this year. 'We know that social media is doing social harm,' Anthony Albanese, Australia's centre-left prime minister, said during a press conference. 'My government and this parliament are ready to take action to protect young Australians'. The ban for under-16s also includes social media platforms like Snapchat, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X. Many Australians appear on board with some age restrictions. In a survey of nearly 4,000 Australians published last month, around nine out of ten respondents said they want some type of 'age assurance' on social media. YouTube is 'not social media,' company says About three in four 10- to 15-year-olds in Australia have used YouTube, making it more popular than other major platforms such as TikTok and Instagram, according to a survey from the office of eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant. Last month, Inman Grant recommended that YouTube be included in the social media ban due to evidence that children experience harmful content on the platform. In the survey, 37 per cent of children who had seen any harmful content online said they saw it on YouTube. 'Given the known risk of harms on YouTube … and without sufficient evidence demonstrating that YouTube predominately provides beneficial experiences for children under 16, providing a specific carve out for YouTube appears to be inconsistent with the purpose of the Act,' Inman Grant's June recommendations read. Under the new rules, children under 16 will still be able to access YouTube, but they will not be able to make accounts. In a statement, YouTube said it shares the government's goal of 'addressing and reducing online harms,' but that it should not be included in the ban because of the service it provides. 'Our position remains clear: YouTube is a video sharing platform with a library of free, high-quality content,' the company said. 'It's not social media'. Australia had previously excluded YouTube from the social media ban because it is a service that '[is] primarily for the purposes of education and health support,' the government said in a press release from last year. YouTube said it is 'considering next steps' while continuing to work with the government. Australian media reported that this could include a court challenge. The ban officially comes into place on December 10.
France 24
2 days ago
- France 24
Australia to ban under-16s from YouTube
Communications Minister Anika Wells said four-in-ten Australian children had reported viewing harmful content on YouTube, one of the most visited websites in the world. "We want kids to know who they are before platforms assume who they are," Wells said in a statement. "There's a place for social media, but there's not a place for predatory algorithms targeting children." Australia announced last year it was drafting laws that will ban children from social media sites such as Facebook, TikTok and Instagram until they turn 16. The government had previously indicated YouTube would be exempt, given its widespread use in classrooms. "Young people under the age of 16 will not be able to have accounts on YouTube," Prime Minister Anthony Albanese told reporters on Wednesday. "They will also not be able to have accounts on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and X among other platforms. "We want Australian parents and families to know that we have got their back." Albanese said the age limit may not be implemented perfectly -- much like existing restrictions on alcohol -- but it was still the right thing to do. Not 'social media' A spokesman for YouTube said Wednesday's announcement was a jarring U-turn from the government. "Our position remains clear: YouTube is a video sharing platform with a library of free, high-quality content, increasingly viewed on TV screens," the company said in a statement. "It's not social media." On paper, the ban is one of the strictest in the world. But the current legislation offers almost no details on how the rules will be enforced -- prompting concern among experts that it will simply be a symbolic piece of unenforceable legislation. It is due to come into effect on December 10. Social media giants -- which face fines of up to Aus$49.5 million (US$32 million) for failing to comply -- have described the laws as "vague", "problematic" and "rushed". TikTok has accused the government of ignoring mental health, online safety and youth experts who had opposed the ban. Meta -- owner of Facebook and Instagram -- has warned that the ban could place "an onerous burden on parents and teens". The legislation has been closely monitored by other countries, with many weighing whether to implement similar bans.
