Latest news with #knockoffs
Washington Post
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Washington Post
China cries foul over Labubu counterfeits. That's rich.
China, long known as the counterfeit capital of the world, has discovered a new respect for intellectual property. It's hard to say what's more amusing about the meteoric rise of China's Labubu toys: the bizarre appearance of the dolls themselves or the fact that they've spawned knockoffs that are sometimes just as popular as the originals.
Al Bawaba
20-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Al Bawaba
Fake Labubu dolls 'Lafufus' are taking over China's market
Published July 20th, 2025 - 08:33 GMT ALBAWABA - The hype for Pop Mart's Labubu dolls is still on the rise. However, with a product's popularity comes knockoffs sold for less than a fraction of the original's price, and Labubu dolls have also fallen victim to bootleg copies. According to Dexerto, "Lafufus" recently witnessed a surge in production, leaving the market flooded with fake Labubu dolls, which made tracking down authentic Labubu dolls difficult. Additionally, vendors and stores are selling "Lafufs" for as low as $10, a tempting price tag in contrast to Pop Mart's original, which costs a hefty $30 per doll (excluding scalper prices and dolls with different rarities and editions, which can cost up to $5000). While Labubu dolls were first launched in 2019, the viral dolls only gained traction recently when Blackpink's Lisa was spotted with one attached to her bag. Moreover, celebrities such as Rihanna, Post Malone, and Dua Lipa also caused an explosion in the dolls' popularity after endorsing them. Labubu knockoffs called 'Lafufus' are flooding the market, with people spending thousands of dollars on dolls that are actually worth less than $10 China's government seized over 46,000 fake dolls to try and fight counterfeiting — Dexerto (@Dexerto) July 19, 2025 Lafufus usually differ from Labubus in terms of quality, appearance, and packaging, as reported by fans of the product. However, similar to other products on the market, some fake versions have become hard to distinguish from the original. For fans worried about whether they bought a fake Labubu, fellow customers urged individuals to check the product's packaging for Pop Mart's logo and an official scannable QR code to avoid mistakes. According to The Economic Times, Chinese authorities took legal action against "Lafufu" dolls, seizing over 46,000 of them due to warnings regarding black market exploitation and violations of the original IP, Pop Mart. However, China's efforts to seize fake Labubu dolls weren't enough, as many fans still prefer purchasing counterfeit products, especially fed-up parents getting constantly nagged by their children for the viral doll. While the issue regarding Lafufs exists, Labubus's success made its founder, Wang Ning, one of China's youngest billionaires. © 2000 - 2025 Al Bawaba (
Wall Street Journal
12-07-2025
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
The Pants Cost $20. They Explain $86 Billion of Costco Sales.
There's a great deal you can learn about one of America's most valuable and beloved companies from a lawsuit about pants. Costco COST 0.02%increase; green up pointing triangle was recently sued by Lululemon LULU -0.84%decrease; red down pointing triangle for allegedly selling cheap knockoffs of the athleisure brand's premium clothing. One of those products is a pair of comfortable, fashionable, wildly popular Lululemon men's pants that came out a decade ago and cost $128.
CBC
11-07-2025
- Business
- CBC
Lawsuits over dupes are popping up in courts. But can dupes be illegal?
Social Sharing To customers, a lookalike to Ugg's Tasman slippers or a knock-off of Lululemon's ultra-popular Define jacket can be a fantastic bargain. But to the companies that make the original products, similar-but-cheaper items can be bad for business. While knock-offs are nothing new, dupes — short for "duplicate" — have exploded in popularity in recent years. And for many younger buyers, buying an imitation is no longer something to hide. "A lot of the consumers that we're seeing on social media, on TikTok, are so proudly displaying the dupes that they found, kind of as a badge of honour. That stigma really isn't there anymore," said Julie Zerbo, editor-in-chief of fashion publication The Fashion Law. The rise of dupes has also brought a corresponding wave of lawsuits from companies, saying copies of their products shouldn't be allowed to exist. American Eagle, Sol de Janeiro, Benefit Cosmetics, Deckers Brands (Ugg's parent company) and Supergoop are just a few of the fashion and beauty companies on that list. Vancouver-based Lululemon became a recent entrant when it sued Costco late last month over three products it said were knock-offs of its clothing. But are they actually illegal? Intellectual property experts say it really depends on the rights a company has over a product, and whether customers can tell the difference between the original and its copycat. Lululemon sues Costco over sale of alleged knock-offs When do dupes cross the line? The term "dupe" itself has been appearing more in legal filings, says Alexandra Roberts, law and media professor at Northeastern University — including in Lululemon's against Costco. That could partially be because their appeal has grown among online shoppers. "Where in previous years, a company might have just said, 'Oh, this looks to us like trademark infringement,' here, [brands] are kind of building a case around the idea of [a] dupe," Roberts said. "The fact that something is perceived as a dupe ... that all works its way into the allegations." WATCH | Trying to beat online fashion copies: Trying to beat online fashion copies 8 months ago Duration 2:25 Loren Mallett, an intellectual property lawyer in Vancouver, says any case where a company says it's been copied largely depends on the rights it has over its product. Patents, industrial designs and trademarks can all protect certain parts of an item — but a company has to formally register elements like its logo or packaging design. If it hasn't, it's probably out of luck, Mallett says. And even if it has, it still might be OK to sell something really similar. The legality of a dupe depends on whether customers could be confused by the two items and think they are the exact same, Roberts says. In Lululemon's case, for example, the question might be whether buyers of the Costco sweatshirt thought they were purchasing Lululemon's Scuba hoodie, Roberts says. She says people tend to like dupes specifically because they aren't the real deal, but a cheaper alternative. And for that reason, she says, many may not be successfully litigated against. LISTEN | Dupe culture: Why Gen Z is embracing fakes: While we don't necessarily think of them as dupes, generic brands — think Life brand products sold at Shoppers Drug Mart, or Walmart's Great Value — have occupied this space for a long time, Roberts says. And historically, courts have allowed them because customers understand that one is meant to be a cheaper alternative to the other. Mallett adds that the conversation around dupes could impact companies like Lululemon in court, as many customers have said online that some of Costco's products look just like Lululemon's. The athleisure company will likely argue this as evidence that Costco wanted to pass off its product as a Lululemon item — whereas Costco will likely say it is proof the customer knew for a fact they were buying a similar-looking alternative at a lower price, according to Mallett. A case study Zerbo says many dupe-related cases are still making their way through courts. But there are some resolved ones where the lookalike has come out on top. She points to a recent conflict in the U.S. between Steve Madden and Ganni as a good example. Danish footwear brand Ganni sent cease-and-desist letters to some companies that sold certain Steve Madden shoes, saying they looked too similar to its own buckle ballerina flats and two-strap sandals. But Steve Madden turned around and sued Ganni, saying it had no right to tell those retailers they couldn't sell the similar Steve Madden shoes, because there was "nothing new or original" about a shoe made of leather and that has straps, eyelets and buckles — common elements in lots of footwear. Ganni ultimately walked back its original legal threats, Zerbo said, and even agreed not to sue in the future over the shoe designs. (Ganni was more successful in its home country of Denmark, however.) Zerbo says these cases show how courts generally don't want monopolies, and try to prevent giving a brand that kind of power. "That would be bad for competition, that would be bad for consumers, prices would go through the roof." What does that mean for my dupes? Zerbo says duping is unlikely to slow down anytime soon, as many shoppers love a good deal. "It's such a big market. There's so much consumer demand for dupes that companies would be hard pressed to stop trying to make them." If anything, she says some luxury brands have relied on their name to appeal to customers, and have "rested on their laurels" rather than innovating.
Yahoo
05-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Lululemon Sues Costco Over ‘Dupes' of Pants and Jackets
Lululemon is taking Costco to task for allegedly knocking off its pants, hoodies and jackets and selling the dupes at a fraction of the price. Filed Friday in a United States District Court for the Central District of California, the Canadian athleticwear brand's lawsuit alleges that Costco perpetuated trade dress infringement and unfair competition by creating its own cheaper versions of popular Lululemon products like Scuba hoodies and sweatshirts, Define jackets and ABC pants, which range in price from $98 to $128. Some of Costco's nearly-identical versions of these products retail for less than $20. More from Sourcing Journal Shein Faces Copyright Infringement Complaint from Brandy Melville QVC and Cornerstone File FMC Complaint Against ONE for Alleged Failure to Fulfill Contract Material World: MycoWorks Melds Reishi and Danish Design in Nordic Light According to Lululemon, the brand's success has given way to the rise of knockoffs of its designs, a phenomenon that's become so widespread that there is a 'LululemonDupes' hashtag on TikTok wherein users share and promote copycat products. The infringing products create an improper association with the brand, with some shoppers believing they are authentic and others specifically purchasing them because they're tough to distinguish from authentic Lululemon merchandise. Lululemon asserted that Costco has been willful and complicit in perpetuating deceptive sales practices, writing in its complaint that it had already served Costco with a cease-and-desist letter to no avail. The similarities in the products have been well-documented in the media; the Washington Post published an article titled 'Is That Hoodie a Lululemon or a Costco Dupe? No One Has to Know But You, while the New York Times ran a piece featuring the headline, 'Are These $20 Costco Pants a Lululemon Dupe? We Investigated.' The athleisure label also asserted that Costco is known to use manufacturers of popular brands' products for its own Kirkland private label. The line, which has developed its own cult following, now accounts for over one-third of Costco's sales. Neither Costco nor its manufacturers disclose the connection between Kirkland products and the original branded products—a source of ambiguity that Lululemon said 'preconditions at least some consumers into believing that private label, KIRKLAND-branded dupes are in fact manufactured by the authentic supplier of the 'original' products.' In other words, Costco consumers may believe they are getting the same product they might buy at Lululemon, just unbranded. 'Defendant does not dispel this ambiguity'—and in fact, it benefits from it, the complaint said. Now, Lululemon is seeking an award of damages in the form of lost profits, or other damages adequate to compensate for the patent infringement. It is also seeking an order permanently preventing Costco and any of its associated businesses or vendors from manufacturing, importing, advertising, marketing or selling products that infringe upon its trade dresses. The company is demanding a trial by jury.
