FASHION LAWS IN INDIA: OVERVIEW AND LANDMARK CASE LAWS

Arunima Sen,

Sister Nivedita University, Kolkata

"Fashion is about something that comes from within you"

~Ralph Lauren

Fashion, in popular culture, is often perceived to be all about high-paid models walking on ramps wearing renowned labels and designers. But in reality, fashion is much more a part of our everyday lives than it is thought to be. Fashion not only revolves around clothing and apparel, but also involves several other aspects such as designs, art, copyrights, patents, trademarks, sustainability, and the like. It is a domain that contains several dimensions such as media, business development, designers, and photography among others. 

Fashion laws in India

Historically, India, being one of the largest producers of silk, jute, and cotton across the world, there was a need to protect the textile industry in India. In India, fashion law is emerging as a highly lucrative domain that deals with a diverse combination of various legislations. The fashion industry is still in the process of development in India generates large-scale employment opportunities and is a source of revenue for the Indian economy as well.

 Although there is no specific legislation that deals with fashion laws in India, it is governed by several laws such as the Copyright Act of 1957, Designs Act of 2000, Intellectual Property Rights, Labor Laws, Advertising Laws, Environmental Laws, Patent Act of 1970, Trademark Act of 1999, Consumer Protection Laws, Foreign trade Laws, etc. The relationship between these laws and fashion has been elucidated briefly as follows:

(i)Copyright Act of 1957

The Copyright Act of 1957 in India safeguards unique works of art, literature, music, and fashion designs from intellectual property theft. The major purpose is to protect designs and patterns by allowing designers to register them under copyright laws. Designers who achieve these requirements have the exclusive right to duplicate and distribute their work.

(ii)Design Act of 2000

The Design Act of 2000 protects unique designs in India, such as shapes, patterns, colors, and combinations that set garments apart. The Act forbids design piracy and is governed by Design Rules 2000 classes 2, 3, 5, 10, and 11. To be eligible for registration, designs must be new, unknown before filing, distinct from existing designs, and free of scandalous or obscene material.

(iii)Labor laws

Labor laws governing India's fashion sector include the Factories Act of 1948 and the Minimum Wage Act of 1948. The Factories Act establishes working conditions, safety, and health standards, as well as working hours laws that cover the employment of women and children. The Minimum Wage Act regulates minimum wage rates, as well as regulations for working hours and overtime pay.

(iv)Advertising Laws

The Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), a self-regulatory organization, oversees Indian advertising laws. The ASCI's code of ethics establishes advertising standards, mandating that advertisements be accurate, not objectionable to the public, and by the law. 

(v)Environmental laws

India's fashion business must adhere to environmental regulations such as the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1974, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1981, & the Environment Protection Act of 1986. These policies were enacted to prevent and control environmental contamination. The fashion industry is especially prone to pollution due to the use of chemicals and dyes in textile production. Furthermore, these regulations govern refuse disposal and wastewater treatment. The

Indian Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules of 1989 and the Ozone Depletion Substances (Regulation and Control) Rules of 2000 are two pieces of legislation that set rules and regulations for the fashion industry. 

(vi) Patent Act, 1970

Patents protect the unique designs and ideas of fashion designers. Patents in India are registered with the Patent Office per the Patent Act of 1970. Once registered, the patent holder has exclusive rights to use the patented design and can take legal action against any violation of their patent rights.

(vii)Trademark Act, 1999

A trademark, defined under the Trademark Act of 1999, is any term or symbol that differentiates a brand or organization. It boosts a product's reputation, guarantees quality, certifies uniqueness, and distinguishes it from imitations. To qualify for trademark protection, a product must be distinctive enough to attract customers. In India, trademarks, both registered and unregistered, are protected from infringement. To be registered, a trademark must be distinctive and not confusingly similar in sound, meaning, or appearance to other trademarks.

(viii) Foreign Trade Laws

The Indian government regulates the import and export of textile and clothing products through its Foreign Trade Policy, which establishes guidelines for encouraging exports, providing incentives, and enforcing import restrictions.

(ix)The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act of 1999 protects the geographical origin of products. In the fashion business, this legislation is critical for conserving regionally distinct traditional textiles and handicrafts.

Landmark Cases in India

There have been several cases related to fashion laws in India as well as internationally, some of which have also received wide media coverage. 

Some of the well-known precedents in India have been given as follows:

(i)Ritika Private Limited v. BIBA Apparels Private Limited (2016)

This case involved a legal dispute between two well-known brands in India, namely, BIBA and Ritu Kumar, which are owned by BIBA Apparels and Ritika respectively, the latter made a claim that the former brand has used its designs & produced garments based on the same and thus is liable for copyright infringement. It must be noted that

Ritika’s designs were not registered following the provisions of the Designs Act, of 2000. Despite this fact, Ritika claimed that her designs were eligible for copyright protection since each design consists of unique elements such as sleeves, front and back panels, etc. BIBA Apparel responded to the accusation by making the claim the charges of copyright infringement brought by Ritika did not stand under Section 15(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 since her designs were industrial.

(ii)Microfibres v. Girdhar & Co. (2006)

This case involved two businesses, X and Y, involved in the production of upholstery fabrics. Company X accused Company Y of copying the designs of the former and producing materials that resembled those of the former. Company Y responded to the accusation by contending that the design by Company X ought to be registered under the Designs Act, of 2000, as opposed to the Copyright Act, of 1957. The Delhi High

Court gave the verdict that Company X’s designs did not qualify for copyright protection and thus its plea was rejected. 

(iii)Mr. Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Ltd. v. Manish Johar (2019)

This ruling was the outcome of the appellant/defendant's appeal against the temporary injunction application's approval, which forbade the respondent/plaintiff from offering the plaintiff's fabric print designs for sale or distribution. The claim against the respondent was that he had infringed plaintiffs' copyright and trademark rights by using the names and marks of the parties that had been offended, forging, copying, and using their fashionable attributes, and dishonestly exchanging their design items. Upon comparing the marks of the plaintiffs and the aggrieved parties, it was evident that the defendant's name had been created to mislead and confuse the consumers into requesting that the responder give the offended party counterfeit products so they could be destroyed. 

Under the Copyright Act 1957, the complainant's imprint under the trade name "ALLEN SOLLY," which was protected by copyright, was allegedly being imitated by the offended party, who claimed to be busy assembling. 

The defendant was charged with selling the plaintiffs' fashion items, using their labels and insignia without authorization, and duplicating their distinctive features in violation of the plaintiffs' copyright and trademark rights.

(iv)Rajesh Masrani v. Tahiliani Designs Pvt. Ltd. (2008)

This decision was the outcome of the appellant/defendant's appeal against the approval of a temporary injunction application that banned the respondent/plaintiff from distributing or selling the plaintiff's fabric print designs. The appellant/defendant claimed that because the plaintiff's textile patterns were not registered under the Design Act of 2000, they were not artistic works under the Copyright Act of 1957, and hence the plaintiff was ineligible for protection under that statute. Furthermore, even if these designs were copyrighted, their unregistered status makes them unenforceable. On the other hand, the plaintiff/respondent alleged that the defendant engaged in extensive mimicry of the designs and that the drawings made, or the patterns printed or incorporated are artistic pieces rather than designs. 

The High Court refused the appeal, stating that the first appellate court would not overrule the learned trial court's conclusions in that case and that the case at issue was a clear example of copyright piracy. 

Some international precedents are as follows:

(v)Adidas v. Skechers (2015)

Adidas is an athletic shoe and apparel manufacturer, while Skechers is a brand in the same business. Adidas has launched a lawsuit against Skechers for infringement. Adidas claimed that Sketchers had plagiarized two Adidas shoe designs: the "Onix" model from Skechers violated the trade dress of Adidas' "Stan Smith" sneaker, and the "Cross Court" model from Skechers violated Adidas' "Three-Stripe" trademarks. Adidas also sued Sketchers for infringing on the concept of "Springblade" sneakers. Skechers' "Mega Flex" shoe features the "Mega Blade 2.0" and shares many similarities with Adidas' offering. The court issued a preliminary injunction in favor of Adidas and ordered Skechers to cease production and sale of the three goods. The court concluded,

"The product is clearly influenced by that of its direct competitor." 

(vi)Christian Louboutin v.  Mr. Pawan Kumar &Ors. (2017)

Christian Louboutin SAS, a footwear and accessories business, announced that it has registered "RED SOLE". The mark was a specific shade of red that the footwear brand affixed to the soles of the ladies' shoes it produced. Plaintiff sued Abubaker and other shoe outlet owners for trademark infringement, passing off, damages, and other claims because they used the same red color for the soles of the ladies' footwear they created. The Plaintiff further demanded a judgment against the defendants, as well as a payment of Rs. 1,000,000 in compensation for the plaintiff's trademarks' loss of sales, reputation, and goodwill as a result of the defendants' illegal activity. 

The case's judge ruled in the plaintiff's favor. The court awarded punitive damages to the plaintiff against the defendant for portraying the plaintiff's belongings as the defendant's own.

CONCLUSION

Fashion, as a phenomenon has undergone several changes and has grown progressively over time, and so has its relevance. As its relevance has increasingly begun to grow, the need for laws and regulations has been felt both in India as well as internationally. Despite there being no legal provisions to exclusively govern fashion, the existing legislations in India have been effective in dealing with the issues that have occurred so far. That is not to say that a legislation is completely unnecessary in this regard. Law is perpetually evolving with time and will continue to do so, with more and more regulations and provisions coming into being. Since the law is not exhaustive, there is always a scope for bringing in new legislation. As has been described above, there have been more than several instances of disputes occurring in the fashion industry in India and internationally alike. The discipline of fashion law being comprised of a diverse range of dimensions, is a part of our lives in a significant way. In conclusion, fashion laws in India are an amalgamation of a multitude of existing laws that are put into action to deal with issues related to the fashion industry. 

REFERENCES:

1. Vaishnavi Parate, 10 Important Cases of Fashion Law, LEGAL BITES (July 05, 2024,

01:10 PM), https://www.legalbites.in/fashion-law/10-important-cases-of-fashion-law975691

2.  Trisha Varaiya, 10 Landmark Cases in The Fashion Industry, FASHION & LAW JOURNAL (July 05, 2024, 07:20 PM), https://fashionlawjournal.com/10-landmarkcases-in-the-fashion-industry/

3.  Kanishka Singh, An Overview of Fashion Laws in India, IPLEADERS (06 July, 2024, 11:05 AM), https://blog.ipleaders.in/an-overview-of-fashion-laws-in-india/

4. Naresh Kumar, Fashion Laws in India, LAWNOTES4U (05 July, 2024, 01:30 PM), https://www.lawnotes4u.in/fashion-laws-in-india/