- with Inhouse Counsel
- in United States
- with readers working within the Consumer Industries, Technology and Retail & Leisure industries
In the social media era, the rise of so-called "dupes" (lower-priced look-alike versions of popular products) has shifted from a fringe practice into a mainstream consumer trend. Platforms like TikTok and Instagram actively promote comparison shopping, and entire retail categories now thrive on offering products that resemble premium brands.
For brand owners, this evolution presents both reputational and legal challenges. Lululemon's recent brand-protection strategy illustrates how companies are adapting intellectual property law to meet these new realities.
How did we get here?
The Rise of Dupe Culture
"Dupe" content dominates social media feeds, pairing luxury or premium products with visually similar alternatives marketed at a fraction of the cost. Influencers position dupes as savvy consumer choices, often emphasizing aesthetics over quality or durability.
While this type of comparison shopping is not inherently unlawful, it accelerates the erosion of brand differentiation, particularly when consumers associate premium design with low-cost substitutes.
From a legal standpoint, this trend places pressure on traditional IP frameworks, which were largely developed in a pre-social-media marketplace. The question for brands is no longer limited to whether a product was copied, but how that product is being described, promoted, and discovered online.
Lululemon's Shift in Strategy
Rather than relying solely on traditional takedown requests or infringement litigation, Lululemon has taken a more proactive approach: specifically, they are seeking trademark protection for language associated with dupe culture itself.
By attempting to control how its brand name appears alongside the term "dupe," Lululemon is targeting not just imitation products, but the digital marketing ecosystem that drives their visibility.
This strategy reflects an important shift in brand protection, acknowledging the fact that controlling search terms, hashtags, advertising keywords, and affiliate marketing language can be as significant as policing physical design copying. In a market shaped by algorithms, visibility is leverage.
Beyond Trademarks: Design and Trade Dress
Trademark filings are only part of the picture. Lululemon has also pursued enforcement actions related to product design, including claims centered on trade dress and design infringement. These claims focus not on logos or labels, but on the overall look and feel of certain garments – elements such as construction details, silhouettes, and distinctive styling.
To prevail on these claims, a brand must show that the design elements function as identifiers of source rather than purely functional features. That burden is not insignificant, but when met, it allows companies to protect product appearance without relying on word marks alone.
What Brands and Businesses Should Learn
The broader takeaway is that intellectual property protection must evolve alongside consumer behavior. For companies navigating highly visible digital marketplaces, several lessons stand out:
- Brand protection extends beyond products to language and marketing.
- Social media has transformed how infringement and dilution occur.
- IP strategy should account for search behavior, not just physical copying.
- Enforcement requires balance to avoid reputational backlash.
Importantly, nearly every consumer-facing business (whether in fashion, technology, or consumer goods) faces similar exposure in an algorithm-driven economy.
A New Reality for Brand Protection
The modern IP landscape is no longer limited to counterfeit goods or knockoff logos. It encompasses how brands are referenced, compared, and commoditized online. Lululemon's approach signals a broader trend toward treating visibility, language, and discoverability as protectable assets.
For businesses intent on preserving brand value, the lesson is clear: intellectual property strategies must be forward-looking and adaptable. In the social media era, brand protection does not end at the product – it must include how the product is talked about.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
