A family "discussion" has arisen. Since the issue involves words and shades of meaning, I of course ask the aid of my colleagues here on Wordcrafter.

Specifically -- what are the different implications of calling, for example, a Gucci(TM) handbag a "fake," "counterfeit," "imitation," or a "knockoff?"

Some might suggest a certain criminal intent to "counterfeit," while there is a flattering overtone to "imitation," and an element of jocularity to "knockoff..."

Perhaps these terms can be conjugated, much like the famous string:
"I am resolute, you are stubborn, he's pig-headed."

Robert, in the fashion industry, the term most frequently used is "knockoff." Everybody knows it's done, everybody expects it eventually, but it is an unauthorized action. Fashion piracy is a big deal. Those unfamiliar with it would be astounded at the lengths to which designers and buyers and marketers go to protect original designs for the upcoming season.

I don't know about the fashion industry, but I'd use imitation because that sounds the best of the bunch. Fake sounds fraudulent, as does counterfeit. I personally don't think I've ever used the word knockoff.

Interestingly, I looked up fake to see if I was correct about it meaning fraudulent (I was), and the first definition in Dictionary.com is "One loop or winding of a coiled rope or cable." I agree with Zmj from another thread, where he says, "The things I learn looking things up in a dictionary."

quote:

Gucci(TM)

Is that pronounced, "Gucky?" Sounds to me like a barf bag on an airplane. So who cares if someone copies it! And if it's "Goochy," it sounds like something to carry dirty diapers in, so once again, who cares!?!?

quote:

So who cares if someone copies it!

The manufacturers who've spent time and money creating it, that's who!

Imitation is far easier and far less expensive than creation. I believe that creators deserve to benefit from their creativity; if they didn't, then nothing new would ever be created!

quote:

Perhaps these terms can be conjugated, much like the famous string:
"I am resolute, you are stubborn, he's pig-headed."

I think you're right here, RJA. The girl who wants to save money but still have some of the fashion of the original will call it a knockoff. The snob who wants only the original would call it a counterfeit. I would simply say for myself "why get an imitation or something I didn't want in the first place?"

Caterwauller has got the flavor I was seeking on shifting emphasis, given one's personal perspective.

And by the way, Cat, you are clearly too secure to be valuable to label-merchants!

quote:

Imitation is far easier and far less expensive than creation.

So THAT'S what all this right-wing anti-cloning fuss is about! Will we be able to sue a scientist for copying us? Then there was the robot clone in "Star Wars," R2 Me 2.

Asa:

You may not have the rights to your own DNA -- see for example current Scientific American article on "Owning the Stuff of Life." http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&a...3CC-8B1583414B7F0101

And it was SF writer Stanislaw Lem, back in '60s and '70s, who began exploring the implications of infinite mutability of humanity. Not a right- OR left-wing issue.

Finally, intellectual property, the fruit of humanity, may prove even harder to pin down than humanity itself. Consider Data from STNG. Is he human? Are his creations "intellectual property?"

quote:

you are clearly too secure to be valuable to label-merchants!

Thanks . . . or am I just so woefully out-of-touch with haute couteur that I've given up all hope of being fashionable?

Ah . . . the curse (and the stereotype) of middle-aged librarians.

As for me, I am just plain clueless. I have always liked Dooney and Bourke handbags, but could never afford them. One day, walking out of work, someone was selling them, so I bought a wallet with one of their signature ducks on it. I loved that wallet...until the little duck rubbed off!

[QUOTE]why get an imitation…?
Remember that "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." And, why not leave it to the prospering lawyers to sort out the legal from the illicit presentations?
Pearce