
The Itsy-Bitsy, Teenie-Weenie, Very Litigious Bikini - danso
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/20/business/kiini-bikini-lawsuit-ipek-irgit-solange-ferrarini.html
======
WalterBright
This is more common than you might think. A company once sent me a demand that
I stop distributing my game Empire as I'd copied it from them.

Turns out I had a registered copyright for it that preceded their company by
about 10 years.

Some people are just shameless.

~~~
ClassyJacket
Could you expand on this registered copyright thing? Which country? I'm aware
of registered trademarks, but I've never heard of registered copyright - only
the kind that automatically exists as soon as you create a work.

~~~
delinka
In the US, you can officially register your copyright by filling out a form,
paying a small fee, and supplying a copy for archiving in the Library of
Congress. It makes defense of your copyright much easier.

------
cwkoss
Very disappointing. Irgit shouldn't have won a single suit: fashion design is
not copyrightable. Courts overreached here, especially as Irgit purchased this
design and did not make it herself.

~~~
Deimorz
The bikini style is probably unique enough that it could be considered "trade
dress", which is protected by IP law:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress)

The article mentions trade dress being an aspect of their lawsuit against
Neiman Marcus and some other companies.

~~~
hmahncke
Trade dress was the basis for (one of the?) Apple/Samsung disputes, with Apple
making the argument that the distinctive shape of the early iPhone should not
be copied: [https://revisionlegal.com/trademarks/lessons-trademarking-
tr...](https://revisionlegal.com/trademarks/lessons-trademarking-trade-dress-
apple-vs-samsung/)

~~~
ehnto
Ah yes, the distinctive, never seen before, rounded corner rectangle. A marvel
of ingenuity, creativity, and geometric composition.

~~~
ovi256
Intellectual property isn't always about something never seen before, ever, in
any application, but about something never seen before in that application.
Wipers were famously pateted twice, for ships and for cars. I could see an
argument that applying the rounded corner rectange to smartphones is novel so
it deserves protection.

~~~
mosselman
> Wipers were famously pateted twice, for ships and for cars

And this doesn't strike you as ridiculous?

I understand we want to protect the little man inventor from staying poor as
big companies get rich off of their ideas, but something like wipers being a
patented concept on each different vehicle is not a function of this need.

~~~
ovi256
No, we want to encourage people to take good solutions from a domain and to do
the work to validate they're good for other domains too. That's non trivial
work that needs to be rewarded for it to occur at scale.

BTW, the current state of the art in ship windshield wiping does not look like
a car wiper at all.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_view_screen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_view_screen)

------
iscrewyou
What a fascinating read. Especially Ferrarini‘a comment at the end. I hope she
get a lot more royalties than what the article is saying.

~~~
pp19dd
Not to diminish the sentiment (I agree, she should get a lot more) but the
amount she's receiving now might exceed anything she's ever earned before in
Brazil walking the beaches, so it's not a sad story yet, I think.

From worldcrunch: "According to the Brazilian daily Estadao, a worker on the
bottom end of Brazil’s pay scale earns roughly $77.40 per month, meaning it
would take him or her three years and three months to earn what an average
person at the top end of the spectrum makes in just one month: $3,019."

~~~
jacquesm
That's still borderline theft. She got robbed before and now other robbers
gave her a pittance.

------
gnicholas
Does anyone know more about the etymology of the closing quote “ _I want her
to get screwed in green and yellow_ ”?

I assume this has something to do with those being the colors of the Brazilian
flag, but when I googled all I found was this figurative translation:
[https://www.kwintessential.co.uk/blog/learn-a-
language/idiom...](https://www.kwintessential.co.uk/blog/learn-a-
language/idioms-across-europe-25-different-uses-colour-yellow)

~~~
ulzeraj
Brazilians have terms that make no sense at all even in our own language.
Things like greeting someone with “beleza?”(Beauty?) and the other end
replying with “Jóia” (jewel). Other things include “pretending to be armless
John” and “pull your small horse out of the rain”.

Most of them have some obscure meaning that is unknown to most people
nowadays.

~~~
gspleen
This is strange. I was curious about the meaning of “pretending to be armless
John” so I googled it.

There is only result for the use of that phrase:

Your post.

So what's your fun example situation for us of someone “pretending to be
armless John”?

[https://www.google.com/search?q=%E2%80%9Cpretending+to+be+ar...](https://www.google.com/search?q=%E2%80%9Cpretending+to+be+armless+John%E2%80%9D&oq=%E2%80%9Cpretending+to+be+armless+John%E2%80%9D&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

~~~
soneca
Act as someone who does not understand a situation in order to not do
something or not face the consequences.

An explanation I read is a reference to mutilated men being dismissed from
going to war

[https://www.dicionariopopular.com/dar-uma-de-joao-sem-
braco/](https://www.dicionariopopular.com/dar-uma-de-joao-sem-braco/)

( A Google translator might help)

------
eevilspock
_" In May, in exchange for using her crochet-and-elastic design and her name,
PilyQ paid Ms. Ferrarini the equivalent of about $5,100. (In January 2019,
she’ll get an annual fee of about $7,700.) Neiman Marcus and other major
retailers now sell a suit under the name “Platinum Inspired by Solange
Ferrarini” for about $170."_

Everyone is screwing everyone.

------
cpg
Apple bullied me at some point [https://blog.amahi.org/2011/06/21/apple-hits-
amahi-with-a-ce...](https://blog.amahi.org/2011/06/21/apple-hits-amahi-with-a-
cease-and-desist-wait-what/)

~~~
briandear
The term “App Store” wasn’t a thing until Marc Benioff creates it, abandoning
the mark to Apple in 2008 when he and Steve Jobs discusses it (Benioff gave
App Store to Apple and Salesforce used the more enterprise-sounding
AppExchange.) The only reason that phrase became “generic” is because Apple
made it into a household name. It wasn’t like people were using App Store in
conversation until Apple’s App Store became a thing. Claiming it’s generic is
a weak argument because that term as a description of a store used to sell
computer programs didn’t happen until Benioff and Apple. You didn’t get
“bullied”: you were using a phrase that had a valid trademark issued, knowing
good and well that it was an Apple trademark. And, at the time of the
trademark filing, it was anything but generic. It wasn’t like the term “Coffee
Shop” which has been in common use for a very long time. App Store has a very
specific meaning: it referred to Apple’s App Store, that others have attempted
to use it doesn’t make it less novel. It was novel at the time of filing. It
would be like trying to challenge the copyright on Kleenex or Chlorox: names
that are in very common use, but common use arguments don’t work
retroactively, which is what you seemed to have been arguing: “App Store is in
common use so I should be able to use it.” It came into common use after Apple
trademarked it, that doesn’t weaken the original filing. You could have used
Application Shop, App Shop, App Emporium — a myriad of options. Instead, you
specifically wanted Apple’s mark because Apple had done the work to legitimize
the term so you wouldn’t have had to. You weren’t bullied: the trademark is
valid and you infringed it. That it’s being challenged now is of no
consequence— the mark is still, at present, valid.

~~~
feanaro
Could he had, in your opinion, used "Application Store"?

~~~
xapata
I think so. App sounds like an abbreviation for Apple but Application does
not.

~~~
feanaro
I'm not sure it's a very good idea to start self-censoring word usage based on
whether they sound like a prefix of a large company.

~~~
xapata
In this case it's Apple censoring you.

~~~
feanaro
I would argue that it is the law censoring me, on behalf of Apple. I think the
law is wrong and unjust in this case, though.

------
jpmoyn
A sad tale of hypocrisy and the little guy losing. It would be less upsetting
if Igrit wasn't so sue happy herself

------
mmsimanga
Just the other day on HN was the thread on "Why Aren’t Rich People Happy With
the Money They Have?"[0]

You would think $9M would make her more content with life. But sadly as humans
we seem to always want more. I often wonder whether it is easy to judge
because I don't have that money and those problems. Either way her greed was
her undoing. She could have happily continued making a decent amount of money
from the bikinis even with competitors selling similar wares.

[0][https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2018/12/rich-
peop...](https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2018/12/rich-people-happy-
money/577231/)

~~~
Cthulhu_
Oh for sure, people will keep comparing themselves to others. 9M is still not
"fuck you" money, it'll buy you a Lamborghini but not a classic car collection
and the means to store, maintain and secure it. For example.

~~~
kowdermeister
Please. $9M is very very much deep in the fuck you money territory.

~~~
kkarakk
well i guess the point the parent commenter was making is that it's middle
class fuck you money. once you enter the rarefied space of say, new york's
upper west side it's probably chump change

------
neuralRiot
Using the brand is wrong but making a similar product? Isn't what she did in
the first place?

~~~
ada1981
Right.

Appropriates a handmade native Brazilian bikini, has it made in China and
makes $9MM.

Sues others for making similar designs.

~~~
magic_beans
This is essentially the story of Supreme.

~~~
sincerely
Does supreme sue people for anything besides using their logo??

~~~
simplecomplex
Even their logo makes no sense as a trade mark.

Supreme is a common noun, and uses one of the most common typefaces,
Helvetica, on a solid red background. There’s no unique aspect to their logo
at all.

Maybe I should start a company named The. Start suing any product line
prefixed with “The”

~~~
alasdair_
>Supreme is a common noun, and uses one of the most common typefaces,
Helvetica, on a solid red background.

It's an italic version of (or very similar to) "Futura bold oblique" and it
was used in white on a red background by the artist Barbara Kruger as (massive
irony here) a critique of consumerism. Supreme then took that influence to
create their logo.

~~~
sooheon
And Barbara Kruger is getting nothing for this?

~~~
xapata
Seems that way.

------
ArtWomb
History repeats itself. As Fortnite currently getting sued for infringing upon
dance moves The Carleton, The Floss, etc.

~~~
hiccuphippo
And I've seen the Carlton in a couple of games much before Fornite was a
thing.

~~~
hangonhn
I think the important difference might be that Fortnite is making money off of
them. Not necessarily agreeing with the lawsuits but that may be one reason
why Fortnite is being sued but not the others.

------
lordnacho
What happens it you get bullied by someone into settling a suit and it later
turns out to be baseless? Seems like real life poker.

------
bedhead
This is Skechers' entire business model

------
trhway
or as the saying goes - he who screams the loudest.

