Copycat culture is fashion’s open secret, and designers are pushing back against this culture of replication that drains creativity and distorts what it means to be original.
Designer Desirée Iyama once took to Instagram with an unflinching statement: “Nothing about this is an inspiration. It is an outright copy.” Her frustration came after seeing a near-identical version of her Meraki dress reproduced by another brand. The incident reignited debate around what many now call copycat culture. A popular culture in fashion where replication replaces originality, and inspiration becomes an excuse for theft.
That conversation only grew louder when Kai Collective, founded by Nigerian-British designer Fisayo Longe, announced legal action against Boohoo and Fendi for copying her iconic Gaia print dress. The dress had become a viral symbol of confidence and body positivity, celebrated across borders. When its near-identical twin appeared on a global retailer’s site, it wasn’t just a creative slight — it was a commercial one. These cases underline that copycat culture isn’t a niche grievance; it’s a global pattern with real economic consequences.
The global face of copycat culture
Fashion has always borrowed ideas — silhouettes, patterns, or references to art and culture. But healthy inspiration honours its source. The best designers transform what moves them into something distinct, letting influence evolve rather than replicate. Inspiration, when handled with integrity, becomes a conversation between creators. Copycatting, on the other hand, erases the source. It thrives on speed, trends and visibility, blurring the line between homage and theft.
Copycat culture stretches across the world, revealing how quickly creativity can become vulnerable in a networked world. Designers now move ideas faster than ever via social media platforms and editorial coverage. The same speed that can launch a breakout piece also allows cheap replicas to spread within days, leaving originators scrambling to protect their creative work.
That vulnerability is not theoretical. The World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) outlines practical IP tools designers can use, including international design registration through The Hague System, to secure design protection across multiple countries. But those tools remain underused and unevenly accessed.
Even established designers have felt the sting. In 2022, courts and authorities across Europe, Australia, China and Singapore issued a steady stream of judgments related to design imitation, logo copying and unfair competition in the fashion industry. What links these cases is the imbalance of power: smaller brands struggle to defend themselves while global retailers profit from their creativity.
Independent designers and small brands often work with limited resources: no in-house legal teams, no international patents, and little leverage against corporations with deep pockets and faster production cycles. When others copy their ideas, the battle is rarely about who was first.
In many cases, legal recourse becomes a luxury. Court filings, design registrations, and cease-and-desist letters cost money and resources that emerging labels simply can not afford. Meanwhile, the copied product floods the market, stripping the original of its novelty before it has time to build momentum. By the time the issue gains public attention, the damage is already done. The design’s story — and often its market value — has been rewritten by someone else’s scale.
Read also: The Desiree Iyama issue: When inspiration becomes imitation
The consequences of imitation in fashion
Copying has quantifiable economic and cultural consequences. The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) estimates counterfeit goods in clothing, cosmetics and toys cost EU industries about €16 billion in sales and threaten nearly 200,000 jobs annually. Those figures suggest how imitation can ripple through manufacturing, retail and employment.
On a designer level, IP protections exist but are uneven. WIPO explains that industrial design registration can protect prints and garment shapes, and the Hague System enables multi-country coverage. Still, many designers, particularly in emerging markets, lack access to registration, enforcement support or affordable legal counsel. This flaw turns creative output into exploitable material rather than protected cultural capital.
Cases like Kai Collective and Desirée Iyama expose both financial theft and cultural erasure.” When a signature print or silhouette gets replicated, the originator loses narrative control and market value. But beyond profit margins lies something harder to reclaim: the erosion of creative identity. A print like Kai Collective’s Gaia isn’t just fabric; it’s a representation of women, culture and perception. When that fabric is lifted without credit, it strips the work of its context and the designer of her authorship.
This kind of copying also distorts public perception. Consumers encountering the imitation first may never know the source, associating the design with the wrong brand or assuming it’s simply a trend. For independent labels, that misattribution can undo years of effort building a visual language. The copy travels farther, faster, and cheaper. The original — born of months of research, craftsmanship, and cultural nuance — becomes a footnote.
What’s lost isn’t only revenue, but recognition and the affirmation that creativity still has ownership and that artistic labour deserves respect. Each imitation chips away at the idea that fashion is art, not just commerce.
Public victories, such as product takedowns or settlements, help, but they rarely compensate for the invisible costs of lost momentum and diluted brand identity.
The crossroads of creativity and integrity
View this post on Instagram
Addressing copycat culture demands legal, commercial, and cultural action. Lawmakers and IP institutions can do more to make design registration accessible and affordable, and industry groups can promote best practice standards for attribution and licensing. WIPO’s educational resources and regional programs show one pathway for building awareness and practical protection.
Retailers and platforms must prioritise originality. Brands with scale can use their influence to source ethically and credit originators, while consumers can shift market incentives by rewarding authenticity.
Meanwhile, designers should document their creative process, register designs where possible, and use public and legal options strategically.
Fashion doesn’t need more of the same; it needs what feels authentic. If the industry supports creators through better protection and public accountability, originality becomes a sustainable advantage rather than a risky luxury.
The designers pushing back against imitation are making that case loud and clear. In the end, our collective choices will determine whether copycat culture remains a structural problem or becomes a catalyst for protecting and celebrating authentic creativity.
Read more: In a world intent on fast fashion, understanding the true meaning of luxury has become essential
