In recent years, dupe culture has exploded into a global trend—fueled by social media, influencer marketing, and the demand for budget-friendly alternatives to premium products. What began as a harmless consumer preference for affordable look-alikes has evolved into a widespread practice of replicating the look and feel of original products. This has led to serious concerns around trade dress theft, a growing form of intellectual property infringement.
Trade dress refers to the visual characteristics of a product or its packaging—such as shape, color combinations, design elements, or overall appearance—that distinguish it from others in the market and signifies its source. When companies copy these elements without authorization, they not only undermine the originality and goodwill of the brand but also mislead consumers into purchasing deceptive products.
One of such infringement case has come to light in India. This is the Crocs vs Croose Case, which highlights the escalating problem of dupe culture.
The Crocs vs Croose Case: A Snapshot
Crocs, the globally recognized footwear brand, is best known for its iconic clog design—identified by its unique shape, perforated upper, and the distinctively lightweight Croslite material. These features are not merely aesthetic choices; they are essential elements of Crocs’ trade dress, built over years through extensive marketing and brand recognition.
Enter Croose, an Indian footwear company that began selling products similar to Crocs’ signature clogs but with the brand name Croose which itself was visually and phonetically strikingly simliar to Crocs. From the silhouette to the ventilation holes right down to the placement of the brandname, nearly every visual element closely resembled Crocs’ original design and trademark. Crocs argued that this constituted a deliberate attempt to mimic their trademark and the look and feel of their product to ride on the goodwill that the brand had spent years building.
Upon examining the matter, courts recognized that Croose’s products bore significant similarity to Crocs’ visually recognizable features. The judgment highlighted that such imitation was likely to cause confusion among consumers and directed the trademark registry to delete the croose trademark. The ruling reaffirmed that brands have the right to protect the distinctive identity of their products under intellectual property laws.
Dupe Culture: A Social Trend With Legal Consequences
The Crocs vs Croose case is not an isolated incident—it is a reflection of a larger cultural shift. Dupe culture has gained massive popularity for several reasons:
1. Affordability and Accessibility
Consumers often gravitate towards dupes because they look similar to luxury or branded products at a fraction of the price. Brands like Crocs become easy targets as their products are widely recognizable.
2. Social Media Influence
Platforms like Instagram and TikTok popularize hashtags like #dupes, #designerdupes, and #affordablealternatives. Influencers proudly showcase look-alike products, normalizing the trend of copying designs.
3. Consumer Psychology
Many consumers treat dupes as harmless alternatives, unaware that they might be inadvertently supporting intellectual property theft or unethical manufacturing practices.
4. The Grey Area of Fashion and Design
In industries like fashion, the line between inspiration and imitation is thin. Dupe makers exploit this ambiguity to replicate trade dress while arguing they only offer “similar-looking” products.
However, as the Crocs case demonstrates, similarity in overall appearance can still amount to infringement even if logos or brand names differ.
Why Trade Dress Protection Matters More Than Ever
With dupe culture on the rise, protecting brand identity has become a critical priority for companies. Here’s why:
1. Safeguarding Brand Goodwill
Businesses invest years in building consumer trust. When dupes flood the market, they dilute this goodwill, making it harder for consumers to distinguish genuine products from look-alikes.
2. Preventing Consumer Confusion
Trade dress is designed to help consumers identify the source of a product. Dupes blur this line, creating confusion that ultimately harms both consumers and original brands.
3. Encouraging Innovation
If companies cannot protect the unique features of their designs, they may lose motivation to innovate. Strong trade dress protection ensures that creativity and investment are rewarded.
4. Maintaining Competitive Fairness
Dupes often bypass R&D, quality control, and safety testing—giving them an unfair advantage in pricing. Protecting trade dress ensures a level playing field.
Conclusion: Protecting Brand Identity in a Dupe-Driven Market
As dupe culture continues to redefine consumer choices, the importance of safeguarding brand identity through trade dress protection cannot be overstated. The Crocs vs Croose case serves as a powerful reminder that replicating the look and feel of a product is not a harmless trend but a violation of intellectual property rights.
Businesses must remain vigilant, enforce their rights, and educate consumers about the value of originality. Trade dress protection ensures that brands can continue to innovate confidently while consumers enjoy authentic, reliable products. In a marketplace flooded with look-alikes, preserving the distinctive identity of a brand is not just a legal necessity but a cornerstone of ethical business practice.