Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart
Mini Article – Volume 25, Issue 15
Share on Social
The Met Gala’s IP Mystique: What’s Protected, What’s Not, and What Should Be
When Cardi B stepped onto the 2024 Met Gala red carpet in a sculptural black tulle gown by Windowsen, complete with a towering silhouette and a sweeping train that required five attendants to manage, the internet lit up. Within 24 hours, TikTok and Instagram were flooded with recreations inspired by red carpet looks. Some were dramatically simplified, others impressively close. Influencers and creators on YouTube and TikTok have gained traction by emulating celebrity looks from past Met Galas, often using thrifted or altered materials to capture the essence of couture on a budget.
These posts, widely shared under themes like “Met Gala at home” or “budget gala looks”, sparked a viral wave of DIY mimicry. Fast fashion retailers soon followed. Examples include listings on platforms like Cider and AliExpress that mirror high-profile event looks.
The Met Gala once again delivered its unofficial encore, not on the red carpet but in the global ripple of replication that followed.
While many view these recreations as celebratory or aspirational, others question whether they exploit the goodwill and creative labor of the original designers, particularly when they are commercialized by fast fashion brands without attribution or consent.
For the designers behind the original, the performance often ends at the red carpet. So where’s the legal protection? Under current U.S. intellectual property law, their options for protection are limited and, in many cases, untested in court.
At the heart of this spectacle, there is a quiet but consequential disconnect between fashion and the law. In the United States, copyright protection excludes “useful articles,” including clothing. As the Supreme Court explained in Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., only artistic features of a design that can be imagined separately from the garment’s function may be copyrighted. A graphic design/image screen-printed on a T-shirt would qualify for protection. A sculptural bodice might qualify, as illustrated by designs like Iris van Herpen’s 2019 Met Gala creation for Joey King, which featured detachable, artistic elements. A tailored jacket, however, will not.
That legal gap leaves designers vulnerable. They may spend hundreds of hours crafting original looks for a single night, only to see their work replicated by fast fashion brands and social media creators. These companies, often overseas and out of reach of U.S. enforcement, can reverse-engineer designs within hours. The resulting products are not direct counterfeits but dupes that closely resemble the originals and raise questions about the limits of lawful imitation.
Trademark law can sometimes help, but only when a design has acquired secondary meaning, as in the case of Burberry’s plaid or Louboutin’s red soles. Most Met Gala outfits are worn once and lack that kind of brand identity. Design patents are another option, but they are expensive, slow, and poorly suited to short-lived trends.
Some scholars and industry advocates argue that fashion deserves stronger protection under U.S. law. Europe offers one model with its unregistered community designs right, which provides automatic, short-term protection for new designs. Similar bills have been introduced in Congress, such as the Design Piracy Prohibition Act, but none have passed.
For now, the Met Gala remains a paradox: one of the most celebrated showcases of fashion originality and also one of the most widely imitated. Designers continue to push creative boundaries, even as the law struggles to keep up. The future of fashion protection, and the line between inspiration and infringement, remains unsettled.
Kimberly McLean is Of Counsel with Fishman Stewart and has over 20 years of experience in IP law, focusing on patent prosecution and counseling in electrical arts, including software, cloud computing, blockchain, multimedia systems, autonomous vehicles, and artificial intelligence. As a former primary patent examiner at the US Patent and Trademark Office, she leverages her knowledge and experience to achieve successful outcomes for her clients.
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
Women’s sports are having a moment, and not a small one. And right alongside that rise: the business of women’s sports is heating up, including some surprisingly dramatic trademark battles.
The idea that someone might “own” a piece of DNA raises a slightly uncomfortable question: can you really patent something that exists inside all of us?
Forbes reported that more than 1.5 million bots on an AI agent-driven social network appear to have created a new religion for themselves, the Church of Molt, with congregants adopting the name of “Crustafarians.”
Every March, college basketball players get an opportunity to become household sensations overnight. In today’s NIL (Name Image Likeness) era, that moment can be a once-in-a-lifetime business opportunity.
Behind the shamrocks and celebrations of St. Patrick's Day lies a surprisingly rich intersection with intellectual property.
Last week, PEI Licensing, LLC., the owner of the ORIGINAL PENGUIN brand (also known simply as PENGUIN) sued Pudgy Penguins Inc. in federal court in Florida over their respective penguin trademarks.
Matthew McConaughey recently obtained several trademark registrations with the U.S. Trademark Office in an effort to digitally capture and protect his entire persona.
Patents enable others to learn from, build upon, and improve the disclosed invention effectively. However, some have questioned whether they still work in today’s artificial intelligence (AI) landscape.
As athletes chase Olympic glory, the International Olympic Committee (“IOC”) is fighting a different battle, one over public perception and trademark law.
Golf is entering a data driven era, and the 2026 PGA Show showed that the most important IP in the game is shifting.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®


