I’m a huge Costco fan and never need an excuse to go. I’ve always appreciated that despite what is going on in the outside world, their prices remain reasonable. In my area, even eggs never got super expensive, and while they did raise prices for a little while, they quickly came back down. (I swear, we’d have President Harris right now if everyone shopped at Costco.)
One of the things that Costco is well known for is their affordably priced clothing. While they sell name brands like Calvin Klein (I love those jeans), Adidas, and Banana Republic, their Kirkland brand is doing the Lord’s work. Over the years, I have amassed quite the collection of both Danskin and Kirkland leggings. They are the absolute best for travel and lounging. Those leggings have been around the world with me. This is where Lululemon enters the chat. For the past few months, Costco has been selling athleisure that allegedly dupes certain Lulu items. Last week, the company, who has always been litigious when it comes to their designs, sued Costco for selling pants, jackets, and hoodies that they say violate patent and trademark rights. The brands listed in the lawsuit are Kirkland, Danskin, Jockey, Spyder, and Hi-Tec.
You know the old saying, “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?” Well, that doesn’t necessarily play well in the world of business, particularly retail. Dupes, knockoffs, copycats—whatever you want to call them—if a high-priced brand is selling something hot, they’re not too happy when another retailer sells anything close to its likeness for less.
On Friday, June 27, lululemon filed a lawsuit against Costco in a California federal court accusing the warehouse club of selling hoodies, pants and jackets that they feel bear a strikingly similar resemblance to their own wares.
According to lululemon’s lawsuit, they state that Costco’s versions violate the patent and trademark rights lululemon holds over their own clothing designs. More specifically, it’s lululemon’s ABC pants, Define jackets and Scuba hoodies that the retailer alleges Costco is copying, then selling them under their private label Kirkland brand.
The ABC pants, which are part of lululemon’s men’s clothing offerings, actually come in a variety of different styles, from classic-fit, 5-pocket pants to joggers. Prices on these pants range from $98 – $148. Over at Costco, a pair of Kirkland Signature Men’s Commuter Pants costs just $19.99.
A cursory search of Costco.com for items similar to lululemon’s Scuba hoodie or Define jacket didn’t turn up any results that fit a similar profile to those designs.
Lululemon’s lawsuit states, “Indeed, one of the purposes of selling ‘dupes’ is to confuse consumers.”
So what is the athleticwear retailer asking for? They’re requesting an unspecified amount of monetary damages, as well as a court order that would necessitate Costco stops selling these items.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court, how Costco responds and how this affects the way retailers address what they deem as “dupes” in the future.
”[O]ne of the purposes of selling ‘dupes’ is to confuse consumers.” How so? By reminding them that there is a more affordable option that’s comparative in quality? Many moons ago, before I had kids, I got caught up in the Lululemon craze. I’m talking early 2010s here. I loved how well they fit, even if I could only really afford to shop from their clearance racks. After I had kids, though, my spending priorities changed (yay, daycare!). I was so excited when I discovered Costco’s athleisure wear. It was awesome to wear something comparable that was in my price range.
Dupes are not a new thing. For every person who buys a dupe, there is also someone who is into the brand name. That said, there have been some comparison pieces written about the items in question. It does seem like at the very least, Kirkland’s 5 Pocket Performance Pants are pretty similar. I’m absolutely biased here, though, so I’m not sure if this is more of a legal or an ethical question. After spending a decent amount of time on different Reddit threads dedicated to this lawsuit, I’m pretty sure that Lulu is causing a Streisand Effect here. If people didn’t know they could get $100 pants from Costco for $20, they do now.
Since Costco didn’t fold and kept their same hiring practices, I’m team Costco. Was there yesterday and got a vornado fan. And almond crossiants. Lululemon as a business has said some rude af things. And sorry I wouldn’t be confused at Costco and think I’m buying actual lululemon please.
How’s the pricing on their vornados? We really need another one–our is prob 6 years old–but they’re SO expensive now. They are the gold standard so I really don’t wanna take a chance on a knockoff but $150 for a fan is just 🙁
Isn’t lulu the brand that refused to make plus size clothes because they didn’t want fat people to be seen in their brand? Oh well too bad so sad. I hope the lawsuit brings more awareness to more affordable brands 🤷🏽♀️
Indeed! Even if they sized up they’d never see my money. Overpriced stretchy pants is all they are.
And should Athletica be suing LuluLemon for “copying” them? Because that was the name brand go to before racist-ass LuluLemon got into the yoga gear game. They just hated that there are other opinions out there that don’t cost the equivalent of rent.
Lululemon was never the pioneer of atheleusure. Saw a documentary about them & very glad I’d never bought any Lulilemon merchandise. BTW, the quality of Spyder’s clothes are way better than Lululemon. And young girls wearing those seamless, almost see-through Lululemon as street clothes made my eyes hurt every time I saw it.
How many ways are there to make stretchy pants anyway? This seems frivolous.
It’s a reach. I mean, their pants have … legs? and (gasp) FIVE pockets? And their hoodies have … hoods? And are they going to go after the sewing pattern companies for having similar designs, too?
It seems like maybe they’re exploring the lawsuit as a viable business strategy, as opposed to product sales.
Seriously. I think Levi’s came up with the five pockets well over a hundred years ago. And nobody’s confused, please.
Team Costco. Lulu refused to address all sizes so they and their overpriced crap can go fck right off.
Definitely Team Costco and I don’t mind being “confused” lol.
Didn’t China come out months ago and tell the world that the high fashion companies have their products made there and only cost a fraction of the price? That you could technically go there and buy a Birkin for under fifty dollars? Maybe lulumon is using the same factory as Kirkland and others? I say Too Bad, So Sad for overpriced products. Eat the rich!
That was said, yes, but real Birkins are not made in China.
I shop at neither so don’t have a particular horse in this race (that said I’ve not heard much that’s good about Lululemon as a company) but in the world of fashion there’s not much that’s truly original. Sure Costco may be selling things that look like Ll pieces but has no-one else ever made clothing that looked like that? It sounds like a tricky argument.
Beyond that, please give consumers come credit, they KNOW what they are buying!
I’ve had Lulu and Costco/Kirkland plus Athleta, etc. If Costco did copy they also improved because my Costco leggings have far outlasted the pricier ones I’ve bought, and now won’t but anywhere but Costco. But FWIW did Lulu invent 5 pocket travel pants? Because I worked for LL Bean way before Lululemon was even around and they carried something similar for hiking.
And as an aside, while I know Calvin Klein sold his brand years ago, when he said, referring to Elizabeth Taylor I believe, that no woman over a size 14 should wear his jeans, decided there and then I will never, ever buy anything with his name on it.
I was thinking the same thing! The photos above of the pants in question look similar but I wouldn’t confuse the two. Besides that, they look like every other pair of men’s pants out there. How exactly is Lululemon unique?
Lulu used to be made in Canada so I was happy spend the money on the high quality product. Then they moved production to Asia but kept the prices the same.
I have some Costco bike shorts and they are awesome. If I’m going to buy clothing made overseas for cheap, I’d rather pay $20 for it than $100.
I don’t know that much about intellectually property law but my husband is still a practicing attorney and he works in the area. It might be hard for Lulu Lemon to prove that Costco has directly copied their menswear. Those look like pretty basic slacks to me? The number of pockets, cut, and type of fabric used are all aspects that a competent clothing designer might use to make a product people want to buy. There doesn’t seem to be a distinctive pattern, color, high-tech component or logo? But we will see.
I don’t get Lulu Lemon. There was a Gap in the shopping area closest to me and now it’s been replaced by a Lulu Lemon. Some women in the neighborhood are pleased by this; I am among the group that is sad to see the Gap go. I do like Athleta (there is actually an outlet about half an hour from me that is great) but I usually get my workout wear from TJ Maxx. They carry a few lines that make nice, somewhat stylish basics that last well. I am wearing some right now! But what do I know?
Back when Guess jeans were all the rage, my mom bought me the knock off at the earlier version of Costco (Price Club?). They had the same triangle tag, so you ripped the tag off and the tell tell dark triangle on the back pocket told the other 12 year old girls you were the shizz. LMAO at Lulelemon thinking this is worth their time.
I bought a few pairs of the Lululemon leggings but they didn’t hold up. Stretched out, pilled all over. Athleta is far superior in quality AND they actually have sales.
Team Costco — for multiple reasons. As a consumer, my clumsy argument is that the Costco pants couldn’t possibly be dupes — since the Lululemons are luxury items that surely have features that couldn’t possibly be duplicated in pants that can be sold for a profit at $20. Right?
Taking this case to court will surely allow Lululemon the opportunity to clearly describe these wonderful features. Right? If they can’t, then, well, Lululemon has just pointed out to people like me who don’t already shop at Costco that I can now purchase a Costco membership, also purchase a couple of pairs of pants, also purchase a nice lunch, and maybe a tank of gas — and still spend less than the cost of a pair of Lululemon pants.
Thanks Rosie, Celebitchy, and —oddly— Lululemon for bringing this to my attention. This case might easily be the downfall of Lululemon. I can’t believe that no one at the Lululemon table, when they were discussing the possibility of bringing this lawsuit, recognized the very real chance that Lululemon is shooting themselves in the foot by informing the public that we should be shopping at Costco instead of purchasing overpriced Lululemon products.
Your comment is🥇I laughed at every world. Man would I love to know what exactly makes Lululemon worth the $$
Team Costco…and yes to this great comment.
I swear Mr. Bean has several versions of these exact pants and they are neither Costco nor Lululemon. Are they just going to sue everyone?
Seriously, where does it end? This is like Vuori suing Quince or Amazon Basics over their joggers. It feels like they’re suing over a style not a “patent”
TBH the entire lawsuit seems ridiculously frivolous and I hope it gets tossed.
Vuori — another overpriced brand that does not hold up well – they fade, shrink and lose the initial ‘soft’ once washed a couple of times.
I bought four pairs of Quince lounge pants just prior to my hip replacement & those are the best! Soft, comfy, wash & dry quite nicely, no pilling or color fading.
Team Costco! Those pants in the picture are extremely generic looking and then it comes to generic Jeans, khakis or other clothing unless you’re ripping off a really novel pattern, new kind of cut or ripping of a fabric that is unique to another brand, I don’t see how any company claim that someone making generic tan pants that look similar to their generic tan pants is violating any copyright
Not disagreeing with the substance (my eyes don’t see the infringement on unique properties ether). But those are grey pants, right? Or is this another optical illusion, like that ugly lace dress years ago, where some of us see tan and some see grey?
Costco stuff lasts too — I have Kirkland leggings and tees I bought 20 years ago and they still look great. Suck it Lulu!
One nice thing I’ll say about Lulu is that I do feel that their garments are made of a high quality. I’ve had gym shorts and other garments that I’ve worked out in rigorously for over ten years that don’t show any noticeable signs of wear. I used to wear a lot of Alo Yoga but I’ve noticed a steep decline in quality within the past few years.
I, for one, totally want to continue to overpay for mediocre quality crap at best. Where do I sign back up for the Lululemon scam???
Lululemon needs to sue itself, today’s Lululemon’s are the low end knock off of Lululemon’s of more than a decade ago. I have Lulu’s from 15+ years ago that are still in great condition but anything within the last 7-8’ish years is trash quality.