Lululemon claims Costco knocked off its designs. Online, the big-box retailer has already won

Fast Company

15 hours ago

On June 27, Lululemon filed a lawsuit alleging that Costco has infringed on its copyright with several 'knockoff' athleisure products. It's just the latest chapter in a story of dupe design that's plagued Lululemon for years.
According to documents filed with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Lululemon takes issue with a number of Costco products that it says are intended to mimic its popular designs, including the $128 Define jacket, the $118 Scuba oversize half-zip hoodie, and the $128 ABC trouser. The documents lay out an in-depth explanation for Lululemon's identification of these 'dupes,' pointing to details like the ornamental lines on the front of the Define jacket and the construction of the ABC pants' back seam as examples of intellectual property copied by Costco in its own line of jackets and pants.
As details of the lawsuit emerge, the overwhelming majority of commenters on social media are landing firmly on Costco's side of this debate. It seems that dupe design culture is becoming so normalized that many consumers view it as standard practice.
Lululemon and the rise of dupe culture
In recent years, dupe design culture has been taking over the way we shop. From makeup brand copycats to luxury furniture look-alikes and fragrance knockoffs, it's likely that if you've been in the market for a higher-end product recently you've stumbled across a cheaper version of said product that seems suspiciously familiar.
For Lululemon, this cycle is turning into a tale as old as time. On TikTok, the hashtag #lululemondupe currently yields more than 11,000 videos; videos of affordable dupes of Lululemon products routinely garner hundreds of thousands of views.
Lululemon points to this trend in its suit against Costco. 'There is even a hashtag 'LululemonDupes' on social media platforms such as TikTok that social media influencers use when promoting these copycat products,' the documents read. 'The Infringing Products create an improper association with [Lululemon's] authentic products.'
According to the U.S. Copyright Office, copyright infringement occurs 'when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner.'
That can look different depending on the industry, but in the fashion world it generally protects patented clothing designs that are artistic rather than utilitarian in nature. For example, Lululemon argues in its lawsuit that the ornamental features of the Define jacket are 'not essential to the function of the product,' meaning those features are not a 'competitive necessity' for other companies' apparel products, and therefore should belong to Lululemon alone.
This isn't the first time Lululemon has stood up against alleged copycats. Back in 2021, the brand filed a lawsuit against Peloton—a former collaborator— arguing that the fitness company had stolen its women's athleisure designs, a claim that was ultimately settled out of court in 2022. Lululemon then took a softer tack against dupes in 2023, when it hosted an event encouraging consumers with Lululemon dupes to trade them in for the real thing.
'It's a trend we don't see going away anytime soon. So we decided to actually lean in and embrace it, rather than pretend it's not there,' Nikki Neuburger, Lululemon's chief brand officer, told Fast Company at the time.
The internet sides with Costco
Now Lululemon is once again objecting to what it sees as infringing designs, but in the court of public opinion, it appears the brand has already lost.
On TikTok, one video from the user @thatssority explained Lululemon's argument that Costco's alleged infringing products might cause customer confusion. Per the actual legal filing, 'Upon information and belief, some customers incorrectly believe these Infringing Products are authentic lululemon apparel while still other customers specifically purchase the Infringing Products because they are difficult to distinguish from authentic lululemon products.' (Potential customer confusion is often the basis for trademark infringement litigation as well.)
Several commenters took issue with Lululemon's assertion that Costco's products might be confused for theirs: 'Not a single person has ever been confused about if they're buying lulu or kirkland,' one comment with more than 30,000 likes reads. 'Boycott lululemon because I don't play about Costco,' another adds.