Manolo for the Brides

I got all excited as I was preparing for this post because, hey, it’s finally Thursday and that means it’s time for LOVE/HATE and I have a picture of an uber gorgeous short dress that I’ve been sitting on for weeks now! At least I thought it was so gorgeous as to be beyond reproach.

Maybe I just wanted to love it so badly that my mind played seamstress?

You see, this dress has so much going for it: It hails from the gray matter of Ramona Keveza, who I utterly adore. It’s short, and I like when bride’s switch it up with something abbreviated. Plus, it’s sort of ruffly but not too ruffly, if you know what I mean.

And yet I just can’t shake this weird feeling that if the camera angle was just a tad different, we’d all come face to face with the model’s right nipple. I mean, where exactly do bosoms go in a dress like that? Once they get to wherever they’re supposed to go, are they in danger of falling out during bouts of serious boogying?

In conclusion, there’s a part of me that does love this dress, along with its more colorful cousin. There is, however, an even bigger part of me — a part that measures in at 36DD — that hates this dress and all dresses like it for being a forever unattainable ideal.

FYI: My book, iDo: Planning Your Wedding with Nothing But ‘Net (Paperback) is arriving on people’s doorsteps! This is neat both because it is happening slightly ahead of the June 10 schedule and because, duh, it’s my first book! I’m just a tad excited, and I do hope you’ll check it out…whether that means buying it or asking for it at your local library.

The legality of counterfeit (or so-called designer inspired) dresses is confusing to many people. No one wants to pay full price for what they believe is a designer dress and then discover that it’s a knock-off. But some brides-to-be and their maids, in the interest of saving money, gladly patronize eBay sellers and online shops that blatantly advertise from scratch copies of high-end wedding gowns and bridesmaid dresses.

Counterfeit Chic has a straightforward explanation of how laws and lace intersect:

Like other items of clothing, wedding dress designs are not protected by intellectual property law. One designer did manage to find a loophole, however. In Eve of Milady v. Impression Bridal, 957 F.Supp. 484 (S.D.N.Y. 1997), Judge Shira Scheindlin granted a prliminary injunction against an alleged copyist of the distinctive lace designs on certain bridal dresses. The reason? While clothes are not subject to copyright, fabric designs are considered protectable forms of writing, and the court found lace patterns to be a form of fabric design.

So where does that leave sites like Designer Duplicates and The Bridal Chalet? Here’s a bit of copy from the latter’s web site:

(more…)