6 t* w) x/ ^9 r) X
I totally agree you are paying for the quality, but this understanding is the opposite of what this news suggests. The copyright law doesn't protect the style and cut, thus made it easy and legal for other company to copy the style which is the essential of what the famous designers 'clothes are charging you for. ' u: B& U& j; C+ G$ r: C2 n4 r
. H1 p6 E: P; u. T. t! Panyway, talk to you tomorrow in Chinese.
* v: W U" N& ?2 O/ o3 N, R. f) Z这个你绝对是错了。没错衣服是可以仿,但是根本仿不出那种味道,也就是说形式而神不式,从面料、做工到板型,那可是有天壤之别,如果一件1600多美元的衣服,一模一样只卖几十甚至十几,那穿在身上只能是一种感觉—CHEAP。你想想商家总要有利可图吧,那就只能偷工减料,用最差的面料,最粗糙的做工,最快的裁剪等等,这样帮能把成本压下来,当然大头的钱是不用付了,因为创意是偷来的,但即便这样,这种价钱的衣服也还是不值的买的。我有好些衣服,有贵的(一二千人民币),也有一般般的(六七百人民币),不是我多说一句,事实也是如此,那些贵的,设计的都很大气,颜色也好,面料做工更是没的说,三四年前的如今穿来一点不逊色,再过几年都不会过时,而那些一般般的穿了一年后就不成样了,就得再买新的,这样下来也不便宜。而那些大减价,换季时的SALE就更没什么好东东了。要我说,如果经济投条件允许,应该置办些面料、做工、款式都精致的衣服。 2 g) }7 v5 U. Ubtw,你咋不说你家还住BIG HOUSE呢!
原帖由 34. 于 2007-9-4 23:32 发表 0 N) c% t0 O* Q- O9 \/ c, |( y) |$ C . C& c; ^% ]! P7 j. G" c2 i fI totally agree you are paying for the quality, but this understanding is the opposite of what this news suggests. The copyright law doesn't protect the style and cut, thus made it easy and le ...