American brand Calvin Klein has successfully defended a complaint lodged with Australia’s Ad Standards over a Melbourne store window featuring actress Dakota Johnson topless in a pair of jeans.
The Spring 2026 campaign image, displayed at the brand's Melbourne Central shopfront, shows Johnson seated on a piano wearing only Calvin Klein jeans, with her hair covering her breasts. A complainant argued the ad was inappropriately positioned in a high-traffic retail environment frequented by families and children, and that it exceeded community standards for public decency.
PVH Brands Australia, which manages Calvin Klein locally alongside Tommy Hilfiger and Van Heusen, pushed back, arguing the storefront image was a stylised, fashion-led promotion consistent with the brand's established advertising philosophy. The company noted that Johnson's upper body was fully covered by her hair, that the pose involved no sexual activity or suggestion, and that the minimalist styling – no jewellery, no footwear, neutral tones – was deliberately designed to draw the viewer's eye to the jeans themselves.
“Calvin Klein has a strong heritage of iconic and bold campaigns for its products (including underwear and jeans) which often feature models and celebrities,” PVH shared in a response to the Ad Standards review. “These campaigns heavily focus on the identity of the celebrities themselves.
“This approach has defined the brand’s advertising philosophy of prioritising authenticity and relatability alongside star power. Each celebrity, handpicked for their unique personality, brings something personal to the campaigns.”
PVH declared its belief that the ad did not breach any advertising code.
The Ad Standards Community Panel agreed with PVH, finding no breach of section 2.4 of the AANA Code of Ethics, which requires advertising to treat sex, sexuality and nudity with sensitivity to the relevant audience.
The panel found the image contained neither sex nor sexuality as defined under the Code, and while it acknowledged partial nudity was present, it noted that Johnson's breasts were almost entirely obscured, with no nipples visible and no inappropriate posing or touching. The overall image, it found, was consistent with typical fashion and lifestyle imagery seen across television, magazines and online.
The ppanel also addressed the location directly, acknowledging the shopfront would be seen by a broad audience including children, but concluded the image was handled with appropriate sensitivity given its stylised, non-sexual nature.
Ad Standards dismissed the complaint.