Lululemon claims Costco knocked off its designs. Online, the big-box retailer has already won

In a burgeoning legal battle that underscores the pervasive influence of “dupe culture,” athleisure giant Lululemon has initiated a copyright infringement lawsuit against retail behemoth Costco. Filed on June 27, the lawsuit alleges that Costco has engaged in the production and sale of “knockoff” versions of several of Lululemon’s signature designs, most notably the popular $128 Define jacket, the $118 Scuba oversize half-zip hoodie, and the $128 ABC trouser. This legal action marks the latest chapter in Lululemon’s ongoing struggle to protect its intellectual property in an era where affordable alternatives, often championed on social media trends, are increasingly normalized.

According to documents filed with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Lululemon’s claims meticulously detail the alleged design infringements. The brand contends that Costco’s products mimic specific ornamental features, such as the distinctive lines on the front of the Define jacket and the unique construction of the ABC pants’ back seam. Lululemon’s argument hinges on the premise that these design elements are artistic and non-utilitarian, thus falling under the protection of copyright law. The U.S. Copyright Office defines infringement as the reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work without permission, and Lululemon posits that these copied features are not essential to the functionality of the apparel, making them distinct and protectable assets.

The lawsuit unfolds against a backdrop of rampant “dupe design culture,” a significant trend that has reshaped consumer shopping habits across various industries, from cosmetics to luxury goods. For Lululemon, this phenomenon is particularly acute; the hashtag #lululemondupe boasts over 11,000 videos on TikTok, with content featuring affordable look-alikes routinely garnering hundreds of thousands of views. Lululemon explicitly references this social media trend in its legal filing, asserting that these infringing products create an “improper association” with their authentic merchandise, and that influencers actively promote these copycat items, potentially leading to customer confusion.

Lululemon is no stranger to defending its designs against alleged copycats. In 2021, the company filed a lawsuit against former collaborator Peloton, claiming the fitness company had stolen its women’s athleisure designs—a dispute ultimately settled out of court. More recently, in 2023, Lululemon adopted a more unconventional approach, hosting an event that encouraged consumers to trade in their Lululemon dupes for genuine products. This shift in strategy, described by Lululemon’s chief brand officer Nikki Neuburger as “leaning in and embracing” the trend rather than ignoring it, highlights the brand’s evolving tactics in navigating the complex landscape of design imitation and consumer demand for value.

However, despite Lululemon’s legal efforts, the court of public opinion appears to have already rendered its verdict in the Costco case, largely siding with the big-box retailer. On platforms like TikTok, user reactions to explanatory videos about the lawsuit reveal overwhelming support for Costco, often coupled with expressions of frustration over Lululemon’s premium pricing. Comments such as “Not a single person has ever been confused about if they’re buying lulu or kirkland” and “Boycott lululemon because I don’t play about Costco” underscore a widespread consumer sentiment that normalizes and even champions the availability of affordable alternatives, regardless of copyright law implications.

This public reaction signals a notable shift in society’s perception of intellectual property in the fashion industry. While dupes have always existed, the threshold for public acceptance seems to be lowering, particularly when large corporations are the targets rather than small businesses. Consumers appear less concerned with potential design infringement and more focused on accessibility and affordability, challenging traditional notions of brand exclusivity and design originality. This dynamic presents a formidable challenge for brands like Lululemon seeking to protect their creative output in a market increasingly influenced by social media trends and budget-conscious purchasing decisions.

The Lululemon-Costco lawsuit thus serves as a compelling case study in the ongoing tension between brand protection and the democratization of fashion through affordable dupes. It highlights the intricate challenges of enforcing copyright law in a digital age where social media trends can swiftly shape public sentiment and consumer behavior. As details of the legal proceedings unfold, the broader implications for intellectual property rights within the rapidly evolving retail landscape will undoubtedly continue to generate debate among legal experts, industry insiders, and the very consumers at the heart of this complex issue.