Seafolly declares war on copycats

SYDNEY: Swimwear brand Seafolly is embroiled in at least six different legal actions to stamp out what it claims is the blatant copying of its designs.

The brand hit the headlines earlier this month after it initiated Federal Court proceedings against Sydney company Australian Downtown Marketing (ADM) and its director alleging the company sold copies of Seafolly's "Zambezi" tribal-style design.

However Seafolly CEO Anthony Halas said the ADM case was just the tip of the iceberg with the company taking action against a total of six companies - four of which are in Australia and one each in Italy and Canada.

With national law firm Middletons acting on its behalf, cases against two of the companies have been settled out of court along with a historical case against Queensland company Sevcoy.

Halas said the company made no apologies for the aggressive stance it had taken in ensuring those believed to have copied the label's designs were made accountable.

While the company had previously taken a softly, softly approach to such matters, this was no longer feasible, he said.

"It's become so rife. It's cost us a fortune but we have to. Firstly because my other retail customers get upset when they see a discount department store selling the same design, even though it is an inferior product and neither the cut nor the fit are as good. And secondly because I have to be seen to be doing the right thing. You can't just have other companies coming in and blatantly ripping off your designs."

Seafolly purchased the design used in its Zambezi range from Surry Hills textile design company Longina Philips in August 2006. It later amended the design and printed it on fabric used for a range of bikinis, singlets, dresses and a kaftan.

Longina Philips owner Lola Philips said cases such as these highlighted the myriad of issues involved in design protection. Australia in particular needed more regulation to cut down the instance of copying with vintage design muddying the waters even further.

In the case of Seafolly its design had been very distinctive and the company had spent a lot of time, money and resources on its development, she said.

"I don't blame them [for taking legal action] one bit."

A date has yet to be issued for the hearing.