In 2014, Law Street Media released its first set of law school rankings, in response to the changing legal education industry. Law Street Specialty Rankings are a detailed resource for prospective law students as they consider the many law schools across the country. You’ll notice some differences this year, as we return to the categories we first ranked in 2014. This year, we’ve changed the way we do our methodology slightly, to reflect feedback from our readers and the law school community. We’ve also redesigned our look, to make it easier to navigate and compare various schools. But as always, Law Street Specialty Rankings are built to blend the quantitative and qualitative in a way that accurately highlights the top law schools based on specialty programs.

This year’s law school specialty rankings were compiled by Anneliese Mahoney, Alexis Evans, Celia Heudebourg, Gabe Fernandez, James Levinson, Josh Schmidt, and Marcus Dieterle.

1. Harvard Law School: 95 Points

Jobs: 19/20

Harvard Law offers some of the best job prospects for its students in the country. Students can gain experience while still in school by getting involved in the Sports Law Clinic. Harvard Law also offers other hands-on opportunities that touch on entertainment law, including the Recording Artist Project, an in-house student practice organization.

Classes: 25/25

Harvard offers plenty of classes for students interested in entertainment law. Some of the distinctive listings include “Fashion Law Lab,” “Sports and the Law: Examining the Legal History and Evolution of America’s Three ‘Major League’ Sports: MLB, NFL, and NBA,” and “Music and Digital Media.”

Networking: 14/15

Students at Harvard Law can attend an annual sports and entertainment law symposium to network with professionals in their field. Harvard Law also publishes a biannual magazine to keep alumni and other community members engaged.

Extracurriculars: 14/15

The school has a student-run organization called the Committee on Sports and Entertainment Law, which brings students with similar interests together. Students interested in writing about the topic can work with the student-run Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law. 

Location: 13/15

Harvard received a high score in the Location category because of its proximity to Boston, a city that offers great opportunities for aspiring entertainment lawyers.

Other Rankings: 10/10

Harvard’s law school earned a perfect score in this category because of its consistent placement at the top of other organizations’ entertainment law rankings.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 10 Schools for Entertainment Law appeared first on Law Street.

Today’s growing field of law school graduates and young attorneys seeking jobs is making the legal career field more competitive than ever. In an effort to differentiate themselves from the pack, many graduates have begun seeking further legal education–such as the LL.M–in specialized fields; however, this trend just received a makeover.

On Monday, Fordham University School of Law announced it will be the first to offer degrees in fashion law effective Fall 2015. Students will be able to choose between two degrees: a Master of Laws (LLM) in Fashion Law for those who’ve already completed a J.D. degree, and a Master in the Study of Law (MSL) for business professionals interested in fashion law.

As one of the first law schools in the world and certainly the United States propelling such a distinct institution, the announcement comes at the perfect time. Not only does the LLM offer J.D. graduates interested in fashion an opportunity to further enhance their legal education, but it also provides a niche industry resource to fashion and clothing lines tackling intellectual property, copyright infringement, and counterfeiting lawsuits.

Like many of its other LLM programs, students who wish to study fashion law have the option to do so as full or part-time students and in the traditional LLM approach of two semesters. Copyright, IP, and counterfeit charges pertaining to fashion law are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the program. Students will further be exposed to and taught how to deal with employee issues when dealing with talent and models, regulating claims related to sustainability and data privacy concerns linked to e-commerce and social media.

Traditionally a the LLM has been a tool utilized by international students wishing to gain global credentials, and for J.D. graduates who desire advanced legal study. Although having an LLM does make an attorney stand out due to their specified area of expertise studied, the degree is not required in the United States since a J.D. is sufficient for both taking the bar exam and employment.

Statistics and trends provided by the American Bar Association, however, show that there are more attorneys today than ever. As of last year there were 1,281,432 practicing attorneys, a staggering 21 percent increase from the year 2000. These statistics clearly indicate the exponential growth of attorneys in the United States. They also make clear why students must seek something to set themselves apart from the competition; and for those interested in fashion, Fordham Law School has just made history.

According to attorney and founder of the Fashion Law Institute at Fordham Professor Susan Scafidi, “legal savvy, like business expertise, has always been an important component in building a successful fashion house or design career–it just hasn’t yet been recognized to the same degree…Would we have Tom Ford without Domenico De Sole, or at least a significant degree of legal knowledge?”

Scafidi’s statement further justifies the notion that narrowly tailored institutions such as Fordham’s approach to the legal aspects of the fashion world open up new opportunities for job-seeking J.D. graduates with an interest in fashion. With the ever-growing competition of attorneys in the United States, Fordham’s LLM in fashion law will be beneficial for companies seeking to hire legal advisers with this specific expertise amid the growth of lawsuits and disputes pertinent to the market of fashion.

Symon Rowlands

Symon Rowlands is a member of the University of Miami Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow during the Summer of 2015. Symon now blogs for Law Street, focusing mostly on politics. Contact Symon at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Fordham Law Makes Big Fashion Statement appeared first on Law Street.

Happy Couture Week, my fellow fashion law-istas! On Tuesday while we were just dodging the Snowmageddon here in New York, Karl Lagerfeld threw a garden party in Paris for Chanel’s Spring ’15 Haute Couture show. Things haven’t been all sunshine and daisies, however, over at the Haus of Chanel as it filed a counterfeiting suit just last month.

Chanel is suing online e-tailer Shop Jeen not only for copying its goods but also its way of doing business. Shop Jeen produced imitation Chanel iPhone cases and allegedly marketed them in the same way as the couturier. According to The Fashion Law, Chanel claims that Shop Jeen’s actions have cost it irreparable damage and “the Defendants have been unjustly enriched.” Chanel is demanding $2 million “for each counterfeit trademark used and product sold,” in addition to attorney and investigative fees.

As you know, I’m all for designers defending their own intellectual property, but I’m not so sure about their ability to sue someone for stealing the way they do business. If a product is already a knockoff, wouldn’t it come with the territory that it is advertised in the same way as the original? If it were any other company but Chanel this might not really fly as two separate charges, but I’m sure the kaiser Karl Lagerfeld will be able to get away with it.

It’s cases like this that make fashion law so much trickier than most other intellectual property and trademark lawsuits. The only thing fashion attorneys have to go off of is prior cases. Then again, this is the Haus of Chanel we’re talking about here. Lots of clothing and accessories can be seen as inspired by or imitating the brand that basically defines classic. Yet as far as I can tell, it looks like Chanel’s got this lawsuit in the (2.55 chain strap) bag.

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Can Chanel Sue For Stealing Its Style of Doing Business? appeared first on Law Street.

You may have been following along with fellow Law Streeter Marisa Mostek’s Dumbest Laws series, as she goes state by state revealing the most random and outdated laws throughout the country. But this week, I want to tell you about a brand new dumb law that was proposed in Oklahoma this week, banning people from wearing hoodies. Anyone wearing a hood for the purposes of “hiding one’s identity” could be fined $500.

The Sooner State actually once held a similar law intending to stop the Ku Klux Klan back in the 1920s. Though this time I think the law may have more racist motives. With all the recent incidents of police brutality and subsequent protests, I can’t help but remember Trayvon Martin, who was killed by a police officer in 2012 while wearing a hoodie.

Barring dress codes for certain buildings and occasions, our First Amendment rights include freedom of expression and that includes one’s manner of dress. I don’t know about you, but I certainly wouldn’t want to be hit with a $500 fine just for wearing a jacket with a hood on a rainy or snowy day.

Senator Don Barrington insists that the reason behind such a law is to prevent people from getting away with crimes while concealing their identities. The law would also exempt those wearing a hood for religious, safety, or medical purposes as well as for Halloween costumes. So basically, the only day you can really get away with a crime is on Halloween. But how would law enforcement officers know if a person is wearing a hood for religious or medical reasons? Would they have to carry around special ID? Don’t police have anything better to do than to go around interrogating every single person wearing a hood in the state of Oklahoma?

So Oklahoma, get ready to say goodbye to one of your favorite closet staples. (Whether you’re allowed to wear hooded jackets as long as the hood is off of your head, I’m not sure.) If you don’t like being out in the cold/rain/snow with your head unprotected, I guess you could always wear a hat?

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dumb Laws Fashion Edition: Hide Your Hoodies appeared first on Law Street.

A lot has happened in the world of fashion lawsuits and controversial apparel lately. So this week I thought I’d do a roundup of the brands that have come under fire, or even started the fire, over the past few weeks.

H&M Accused of Producing a Kurdish Jumpsuit

H&M have been inspired by the Kurdish female fighters. pic.twitter.com/3QzC7nQgsA

— Wasan Shoresh (@K4life_) October 5, 2014

Last week people seemed to get all up in a tizzy about a green khaki jumpsuit featured in H&M’s latest Fall campaign. Apparently the jumpsuit appeared to be a little too similar to the ones female Kurdish soldiers wear in the Middle East to defend against ISIS. But if you ask me, such a military-inspired jumpsuit has become pretty ubiquitous in almost any culture. H&M also released the jumpsuit in other colors besides the allegedly offensive green, as well as a denim version. In this case, I think consumers have once again read a little too much into the motive behind the garment. While we should definitely be aware of both the women and men fighting for their rights in the Middle East right now, in this case any similarities between H&M’s version of the jumpsuit and the ones Kurdish soldiers wear are merely coincidental.

Converse Sues to Protect Its Classic Shoe

The only thing more prevalent than the classic Chuck Taylor All Stars are the various knockoff versions of it and Converse has finally decided to put its foot down (pun unintended). Converse is accusing 31 companies, including Walmart, Kmart, and Skechers, of trademark infringement for copying elements like the black stripe along the sole and the rubber toe cap. On Tuesday the company filed 22 separate lawsuits in United States District Court in Brooklyn. As much as fake Chuck Taylors annoy me, I can’t help but wonder what took Converse so long to finally take action. Is it possibly too late? I guess we’ll have to just wait and see if they can stomp out their competition (okay, the pun was intended that time).

Bottega Veneta Trademarks a Knot (or at least is trying to)

Courtesy of Jerine Lay via Flickr.

This one is not really as crazy as the others, but I still thought it was interesting. Bottega Veneta is trying to trademark the metal knot it uses on its handbags, particularly as the clasp for its clutches. Apparently that’s easier said than done. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Offices (USPTO) rejected Bottega’s claim, saying that it was not distinctive enough. The designer then had to re-present its case citing the amount of sales they have made and how notorious they are for this particular “configuration” based on its ads. The company also compared its knot to the Chanel double C’s, the Tory Burch cross, and the Ferragamo bow.  Apparently that still wasn’t enough to convince USPTO, but the design house still won’t take no for answer and wants to reapply. As important as it is for designers to protect “trademark” elements, I hope that Bottega doesn’t get too tied up in this application process. (Okay that was the last one I swear!)

Chanel Sues Over Ghostbusters Sweatshirt

Parody T-shirt brand What About Yves has been creating a stir since releasing apparel with the message “Ain’t Laurent Without Yves,” regarding the haus’s name change to Saint Laurent Paris, a couple of years ago. For the most part the targeted designers let the streetwear brand be, but Chanel is not too happy about its use of the company’s logo. Just in time for Halloween, What About Yves released a Sweatshirt with the classic double C logo with the Ghostbusters ghost in between. I’m not sure if this is just supposed to be a festive clothing item, but if there is some kind of joke behind it I don’t get it. But yet again, why has Chanel decided to come after someone using its logo now? I’m not sure. Maybe they just decided that since the tacky clothier Jeanine Heller has finally targeted them that it’s their opportunity to take the designer-offending brand down. I know I sure wouldn’t mind if they did.

—

Katherine Fabian (@kafernn) is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center and is currently applying to law schools, freelance writing, and teaching yoga. She hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers.

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post This Week in Fashion Law: Kurdish Jumpsuits and Ghostbusters appeared first on Law Street.

Along with the two consecutive award shows this week came two red carpets. Each carpet brought a lot of interesting fashion choices, from Katy Perry’s tribute to Britney Spears to Kim Kardashian’s backwards looking dress, both at Sunday night’s MTV Video Music Awards. The one dress that people could not stop talking about, though, was Lena Dunham’s Giambattista Valli gown worn to the Emmy Awards Monday night. Regardless of whether you loved or hated the dress worn by creator and star of the HBO series Girls, it seemed to bring up an issue of intellectual property.

On Monday night, designer Christian Siriano posted a throwback photo on Instagram of one of the designs from his Spring 2010 collection. The dress he chose to post had a strikingly similar color scheme and tiered tulle skirt to the dress Dunham wore that very night. Hm, coincidence? Probably not. Nice try Christian, but it wasn’t even #ThrowbackThursday.

As much as I hate when bigger designers copy smaller ones’ designs, I don’t think Siriano really has a case here. The only thing the two dresses have in common is the fact that they have tulle skirts. The colors and tiers are far too different for there to be any issue of copyright infringement. The bodices of each dress also give off two completely different aesthetics, as Valli’s offers a menswear-meets-formalwear vibe by matching a collared shirt with a ball gown skirt, while Siriano’s features a simple strapless design.

Even if Siriano did want to get into a legal battle with his fellow designer, there are no laws protecting him. It is perfectly legal to copy a garment’s pattern, which is hardly the issue here anyway. The only way Siriano would have a case is if there was an issue of print-copyrighting and both dresses lack any kind of screen-printing to begin with. Also, Siriano would probably never stand a chance in court against Valli, as the latter is a veteran couture designer and the former is a relatively new designer who got his start through Project Runway and designs for Payless Shoes.

Then again, Siriano definitely wasn’t the only one who thought the dress looked familiar…

Lena Dunham’s #Emmy dress looks kind of familiar. @josswhedon @JewelStaite pic.twitter.com/oEkU7N59nv

— refinery29 (@Refinery29) August 26, 2014

—

Katherine Fabian (@kafernn) is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center and is currently applying to law schools, freelance writing, and teaching yoga. She hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers.

Featured image courtesy of [Lena Dunham via Twitter]

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Votes Are In: Lena Dunham Wins Most Controversial Emmy Dress appeared first on Law Street.

On Monday, luxury department store Barneys New York made a $525,000 settlement in response to a racial profiling investigation by the State of New York. Nineteen-year-old Queens resident Trayon Christian used his savings to purchase a Salvatore Ferragamo belt at the Fifth Avenue store in Manhattan, only to be arrested shortly after leaving. The clerk who sold him the $350 belt had allegedly called the police claiming fraud. Apparently, the company has racial profiling ingrained into its employee policy. Security guards are told to watch minority customers in the store more closely than their white customers, and clerks are to prevent making sales to minority customers in order to avoid fraud investigations. The investigation also found that Barneys must have been collaborating with the NYPD by placing undercover detectives in their store.

These days, you can’t seem to look at the news without hearing about another unarmed black kid who was “accidentally” shot by police. Racial profiling is a not only a violation of human rights, but can also result in serious consequences for the innocent minority victim.

The police told Christian that his debit card must be a fake because a black man could never afford such an expensive item. He was then held at the police station for two hours until they realized that he was innocent. Christian, who is a student at the NYC College of Technology, had saved up to buy the belt because he wanted one like the Harlem rapper Juelz Santana. Lower class consumers are just as entitled as upper class ones to use their own money to buy a designer item, right? Isn’t such a notion the mere foundation of capitalism?

A belt similar to the one Trayon Christian purchased in April 2013. Thanks NY Post.

In luxury retail stores, customers are rarely asked for identification with their credit card because it is considered rude. Part of the luxury customer experience involves being treated well, because they are spending so much money. Also, the more accommodating a salesperson is to a customer, the more money the customer may spend in the store. The main purpose of a retail store is to put the customer’s needs first, as they are “always right.”

On the other hand, stores must also protect themselves with lost prevention (LP) policies. There are plenty of telltale signs that a person may be shoplifting, but being black or Latino is not one of them. Also if a customer is suspected of shoplifting, the salesperson is expected to provide even more service to deter them from stealing, as they are still technically considered a customer if they are in the store.

When I worked as a sales associate in a luxury mall, I went through intensive LP training, but race was never mentioned as any reason to be suspicious of customers. However, we were also constantly reminded that we were to be extra accommodating to customers as they were accustomed to a different level of service than in other malls. Wealthy customers were actually more inclined to try to get away with a quick buck than average ones. They almost expected us to make exceptions for them when it came to expired coupons or discounts they seemed to make up on their own. Shouldn’t that kind of behavior be seen as a bigger red flag when it comes to credit fraud?

Barneys’ claim that they are avoiding fraud investigations is completely invalid, as there are many other ways to prevent shoplifters. Perhaps they would save even more money if they taught their employees real lost prevention techniques, instead of taking shortcuts by racially profiling customers and outsourcing to the NYPD. A minority customer’s business should be just as valued as a white customer’s would be. Ultimately, the company lost even more money because they had to pay for a settlement. Christian also returned the belt shortly after his arrest because he no longer wanted to have anything to do with the company.

The battle is only halfway done, however, as there is a federal case that has yet to go to trial. Hopefully, the trial will result in further regulations in what stores can and cannot do as far as customer service and lost prevention policies. All customers, provided they are not trying to take advantage of the company, should be treated as equal opportunities to make a profit for both the salesperson and the company represented.

At the end of the day, a retail store must focus on making revenue and ensuring that customers will want to return for their services. Turning away a customer because of the color of their skin is ultimately bad business for everyone. Besides, as in Barneys’ case, what’s $350 in potential theft compared to over $500,000 in legal fines? That choice is ultimately up to the retailer.

—

Katherine Fabian (@kafernn) is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center and is currently applying to law schools, freelance writing, and teaching yoga. She hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers.

Featured image courtesy of [Jim.Henderson via WikiMedia Commons]

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Barneys Gets Busted: The Cost of Racial Profiling in Retail appeared first on Law Street.

I’m just going to cut to the chase: I hate Forever 21. Don’t get me wrong, I spent plenty of my parents’ money there on a seasonal basis when I was a teen, but by the time I was 17 I had completely sworn off the fast fashion mega-chain. Ironically, I used to shop at stores like Forever 21 and H&M because their merchandise was strikingly similar to the clothes I would see in magazines. But the more I immersed myself in the industry, the more I learned that these stores were the antithesis to the look I was striving to emulate. Forever 21 blatantly copies designers’ prints from big names like Diane von Furstenberg to independent clothing boutiques. In publishing that’s called plagiarism, but in retail it’s called making fashion “accessible” to the masses.

Courtesy of Simka sol via Facebook

The whole concept behind Forever 21 disturbs me. I used to walk into a store in complete awe, wondering how I was ever going to manage to thoroughly browse through all of the trendy merchandise. Now I walk in and feel disgusted.

I first noticed something was off about the store when I visited a three-level unit at the Garden State Plaza, much larger than any other store I had seen before. The bottom floor was overstuffed with sale merchandise. Upon seeing this I immediately thought, “What do they end up doing with all of these clothes? Surely, not that many people end up buying sale when there’s so much on-trend and reasonably-priced merchandise upstairs.” I pictured those factories where they shred old clothes and realized that even if the store never sells most of its sale merchandise, it will hardly make a dent in the company’s revenue. Forever 21’s clothes could cost around 20 cents to make and they sell them for $20 apiece, that’s a 1,000 percent markup. Something about that just doesn’t seem right.

Copyright laws allow for retailers like Forever 21 to copy garment designs, but not any prints that designers place on their garments. Which, if you think about it makes a lot of sense. Most clothes are made with one of a few possible patterns and ultimately it is what a designer puts of those patterns that makes their work unique and innovative. Considering part of their job description involves designing prints, how is it fair for them to do all the work only for someone else to come along and sell the same thing at a fraction of the price? Not to mention that fast fashion retailers can make a whole lot more money off of a copyrighted item by selling it in mass quantities.

Left: A dress by Diane von Furstenberg Right: Forever 21’s version. Courtesy of Susan Scafidi via Counterfeit Chic

Granted, the role of a fashion designer is also to set the example so other fashion retailers can sell on-trend clothing to the masses. However, trends usually dictate a silhouette or color that is “of the moment.” Sometimes a particular generic print may be in style, for example leopard print, but in that case there are so many variations that retailers can make that it is completely unnecessary for them to literally copy a designer’s version of that print. So why does Forever21 win or settle nearly every lawsuit filed against it?

In addition to over 50 copyright lawsuits, the company is also notorious for numerous labor violations. So not only does it cheat designers out of profits, but it also fails to pay employees fairly. Employee lawsuits go as far back as 2001, when workers claimed they were being paid under minimum wage. There was even a three-year boycott of the retailer by its U.S. garment workers. This year, U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) fined three stores with over $100,000 in safety violations.

Despite all of the company’s lawsuits and violations, Forever 21 is one of the largest clothing retailers in the world, so independent designers and small design firms often do not stand a chance against it. Also, Forever 21 has a history of settling before cases are ever brought to trial. Susan Scafidi, fashion law professor at Fordham University, explains that “they’ve been caught so many times, they’ve been publicly exposed so many times, they’ve even been sued — although many fewer times, because all they do is settle — this is just part of their business strategy. They go ahead and they take what they want, and when they get caught, they pay up. It’s probably cheaper than licensing it in the first place.”

The way Forever 21 runs its business is unnecessary as there are plenty of other retailers who run honest businesses, while still offering on-trend merchandise. Despite their involvement in the Bangladeshi factory collapse last year, Gap is a respected retailer in the industry and often collaborates with high-end designers and the Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA) in order to provide designer fashions to the masses. In fact, the recent explosion of designer collaborations with retail chains like Target, J. C. Penney, and H&M is the perfect antidote to the moral fast fashion dilemma. When designers willingly and legally offer their pieces to retailers, then there is no need to copy their designs because consumers can have access to the real thing at their desired price-level.

High-end designers control trends in this industry, but large chain retailers control how these trends get delivered to about 90 percent of consumers. Stricter copyright laws should be implemented in order to protect the artistic integrity of these designers. The garment industry is just like any other creative industry, so if it’s illegal to copy famous works of art, it should be illegal to copy wearable works of art as well.

—

Katherine Fabian (@kafernn) is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center and is currently applying to law schools, freelance writing, and teaching yoga. She hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers.

Featured imaged courtesy of [Adam Fagen via Flickr]

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Is There A Legal Way to Offer Fast Fashion to the Masses? appeared first on Law Street.

Last month, clothing retailers American Apparel and Aldo fired fashion photographers Terry Richardson and Dov Charney for sexually harassing models. Several models have spoken out about their inappropriate behavior over the last few years, so why did these companies wait until now to react? Justice didn’t last long in Charney’s case, however, as the American Apparel founder and CEO was rehired a week later as strategic consultant while the company reviews any past accusations of sexual harassment.

The modeling industry is one of the few professions where workers are not always treated like real people, because the job description mostly entails selling their bodies. Until fairly recently, there were few if any laws protecting model’s rights. Last year veteran model Coco Rocha and the Model Alliance helped pass a law in the state of New York recognizing models under the age of 18 as child performers, limiting the number of hours they are allowed to work. The Model Alliance has also drafted a Model’s Bill of Rights stating that agents and photographers are to maintain a professional relationship with the models they work with, and it also calls for models to be informed ahead of time if a shoot will involve nudity so they can give prior consent. No model under the age of 17 can pose nude or semi-nude.

But there is also a bigger issue at hand: the female model’s word against that of these reputable male photographers. In this interview with HuffPost Live, Model Alliance founder Sara Ziff explains why she will never work with Richardson again and why models may feel pressured to put themselves in compromising positions, when working with photographers like him.

Ziff mentions the Model Alliance’s amnesty service as a way to provide legal aide to models who have been taken advantage of by photographers, since there are no official laws to protect them in situations like this. The Model Alliance’s efforts are certainly a step in the right direction, but potential clients like Harper’s Bazaar, American Apparel, and Aldo ultimately have the power to refuse to work with alleged offenders. These companies most likely have a zero-tolerance policy for sexual harassment protecting all of their other employees, so why not their models too?

Somewhere along the way, an inherent double-standard formed in the industry. Despite the decent amount of women in corporate fashion positions, the male gaze still governs a lot of what we see in magazines. These models lose their rights as humans because someone like Terry Richardson is an untouchable fixture in the industry. Ziff mentions that a model’s career isn’t really legitimized until she shoots with Richardson. Models may feel obligated to do whatever he tells them to do and he clearly takes advantage of that if he tries to engage in sexual activity with them.

If you need further convincing that there’s a double-standard, here are some of Richardson’s ads with the female models replaced with men.

Courtesy of Lauren Wade via Takepart

Notice this ad blatantly says “For Men.” Fashion is stereotypically a women’s industry yet most ads appear to be created for the male gaze. Is the fragrance for men or are those breasts for men?

Meanwhile, some women have defended Richardson when he’s come under fire. Musicians Miley Cyrus and Sky Ferreira are publicly known to be friends with the photographer and continue to work with him year in and year out. Ferreira recently claimed, “I have never been forced or manipulated into anything. I made a music video with him and I have never felt uncomfortable with Terry and had 99 percent of the creative control.” Perhaps this is because artists are protected by their own celebrity and do not have the same sense of anonymity as a model would. Someone like Richardson may see a model as just a face or body, whereas he may want to go out of his way to please a famous client like Cyrus or Ferreira.

Charney and Richardson have been able to keep their jobs for so long, despite these allegations because they have taken advantage of women whose jobs involve using their own bodies to market a product. Both women and men in the industry, however, need to realize that models are not mannequins, they are people employed to do a job that happens to involve their bodies. The job description by no means includes having their bodies violated for the pleasure of others. Ziff says it herself: “The choice between an uncomfortable sexual situation and your job, that’s the definition of sexual harassment.” If sexual harassment is unacceptable in all other workplaces, it should be unacceptable in these models’ line of work as well.

The Model Alliance is definitely taking a step in the right direction by offering a safe space for models to turn, but in order to guarantee absolute safety in their workplace, legal action must be taken. The laws passed by the state of New York also only really protect underage runway models. Sexual harassment issues lie predominantly with print models, and there need to be laws to protect them both inside and outside the studio. Not all models may belong to the Model Alliance, so if there were official laws protecting them, they might not be so afraid to speak up about harassment.

While it may be difficult to enact such regulations on an international level, the Model Alliance could at least start on a national level in collaboration with the Council of Fashion Designers of America. The industry has a responsibility to protect all of its employees, and that includes its models, the literal faces of fashion.

—

Katherine Fabian (@kafernn) is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center and is currently applying to law schools, freelance writing, and teaching yoga. She hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers.

Featured Image Courtesy of [American Apparel via Flickr]

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Why Does the Fashion Industry Protect Alleged Sex Offenders Over Models? appeared first on Law Street.