Nearly 20 years ago at the 2000 Grammy Awards, Jennifer Lopez made red-carpet history with an instantly iconic green leaf-print Versace dress. You know, that dress — the one that caused so much international commotion it even led to the creation of Google Images. In honor of the dress’ anniversary, Lopez surprised the world by donning an updated version during Versace’s runway show in Milan — which, of course, made the fashion world go wild. And as the Hollywood Reporter reported, all this love has inspired similar dresses from Yandy, CiChic, Indie XO, and Fashion Nova.
On Monday, Versace took legal action against Fashion Nova for selling its version of the dress. "Fashion Nova’s Infringing Apparel is plainly a deliberate effort to exploit the popularity and renown of Versace’s signature designs, and to trade on Versace’s valuable goodwill and business reputation," the lawsuit reads. "Versace seeks to bring an end to Fashion Nova’s latest brazen attempt at copying the work of yet another famous and world-renowned designer."
Versace says the issue is Fashion Nova’s use of its black and gold Barocco design, Pop Hearts design, and Jungle Print design. Versace copyrighted all three prints, but they have been manufactured and sold by Fashion Nova. "Fashion Nova’s ability to churn out new clothing so quickly is due in large part to its willingness to copy the copyrighted designs, trademarks and trade dress elements of well-known designers such as Versace, and trade on their creative efforts in order to bolster Fashion Nova’s bottom line," the lawsuit reads, according to the Hollywood Reporter.
This isn’t the first time Fashion Nova has been called out for making, uh, “inspired” items. Kim Kardashian West shamed the retailer for replicating her vintage cut-out Thierry Mugler gown, tweeting, "It's devastating to see these fashion companies rip off designs that have taken the blood, sweat and tears of true designers who have put their all into their own original ideas." Kardashian West also successfully sued Missguided for using her name and image without permission to advertise their own "knock-off" designs. She won $2.7 million in the ruling.