回應：重談盜版悖論

The Piracy Paradox Revisited

時尚設計對當前擴張知識產權的熱情提出了一個顯著的挑戰。儘管時尚設計缺乏美國版權法的保護，但其開發與創新依然十分活躍。然而，也存在許多觀點支持授予時尚設計某種形式的版權，最近，一份《禁止設計盜版法案》被重新提交國會。這篇短文是《斯坦福法律評論》對話文章中的一部分。本文分析和批判了C.ScottHemphill和JeannieSuk提出的對時尚設計提供有限版權的辯護。我們認為，即使是有限的設計保護也是非必要和不明智的，並且可能會損害其原本旨在保護的設計師們。儘管如此，我們仍在許多其他分析要點上贊同Hemphill和Suk，包括理解被稱為“區分”（differentiation）和“群集”（flocking）的對抗性衝動之重要性，它們刺激了服裝銷售，以及更一般性的問題，即時尚設計不能簡單納入傳統版權法的分析。

Fashion design presents a significant challenge to the current enthusiasm for expansive intellectual property rights. Despite an absence of protection under American copyright law, creativity and innovation in fashion design remain vibrant. Nonetheless there is substantial sentiment in favor of some form of copyright for fashion design, and a “Design Piracy Protection Act” was recently re-introduced in Congress. This brief essay, part of a forthcoming colloquy in the Stanford Law Review, analyzes and critiques a defense of limited copyright protection for fashion design advanced by C. Scott Hemphill and Jeannie Suk. We argue that even limited design protection is unnecessary and unwise, and may well undermine those designers it is intended to help. We nonetheless agree with Hemphill and Suk on many other points of analysis , including the importance of understanding competing impulses — dubbed “differentiation” and “flocking” — that spur apparel purchases, and on the more general point that fashion design cannot easily be subsumed under conventional copyright analysis.