Who doesn’t appreciate a good dupe? A dupe offers an easy, cost-effective alternative that, ideally, mirrors all the benefits of a much more ‘exclusive’ option. Prioritising authenticity over accessibility might seem out of place when individuals are grappling with the pressures of rising living costs. However, the issue is not always straightforward.
As highlighted by Sangeeta Singh-Kurtz in the Cut on 30 May 2023, ‘Today, the dupe itself holds more value than the original, with quality alternatives overshadowed by a flood of inferior imitations.’ Accessibility, particularly in the realm of fast fashion, can have significant human rights and environmental repercussions. The ethical implications vary based on the parties involved – the duplicator and the duplicated. It raises concerns when a large corporation mimics the efforts of a small indie brand. Depending on the intellectual property (IP) rights involved, this replication might fall within legally permissible boundaries. However, the public’s perception might not align with the intricacies of IP protection. Does IP rights even hold weight if public opinion can be swayed?
Edith Hamilton will lead a discussion with her co-panelists representing different perspectives on the concept of duping. The panel discussion delves into the ethical, economic, and legal dimensions of good dupes, bad dupes, rightful dupes, and wrongful dupes.
