Will Google Glass's alliance with DVF help its innovate image or hurt it?

At first blush, DVF seems like a perfect fit to design Google Glass frames. But does the name carry the right blend of fashion and innovation?

In the lead up to the Google I/O Conference in San Francisco, Google has announced 12 new updates for Glass and released the product for sale in the UK. But the big question remains: How will consumers respond?

The first thought of fashion watchers learning that Google has announced a new range of Google Glass frames created in partnership with fashion designer Diane von Furstenberg's studio, DVF, may be that Google is aiming for older money. After all, the DVF brand conjures images of wealth, excess, and animal prints.

However, those who follow fashion history and politics may also chuckle at the DVF choice: Have the "geeks" at Google made a social blunder by giving an inadvertent blessing to design piracy?

DVF is an ironic choice of designers since Ms. von Furstenberg is widely accused of having made one of the most blatant design piracies in fashion history – the Claire McCardell wrap dress of 1942 which, according to PBS, von Furstenberg presented as her own original design in the 1970s. 

PBS has called von Furstenberg a “deeply ironic example” of fashion hypocrisy. She is president of the Council of Fashion Designers of America, the main organization fighting for legislation to protect people's designs, and the woman known throughout the fashion world for a “stolen” design that made her career.

“There’s no doubt that von Furstenberg is familiar with McCardell, but that has not stopped her from laying claim to a design that was not only popular in the 1940s, but was trendy in ancient Greece,” PBS reported. “Nor has it stopped her from championing legislation that she could never use to claim ownership of the design that has defined her career.”

Unlike tech companies, which can rise and fall on copyright claims, fashion designers have historically been denied copyright protection because the courts decided long ago that utilitarian articles should not be protected by copyright.

The fashion industry has attempted to change these laws for years, introducing and reintroducing bills such as the Innovative Design Protection Act (a.k.a. the “Fashion Bill”), which died in committee in 2012. 

Therefore, seeing an innovative behemoth shake hands with DVF in one of the most litigious industries on the planet in order to make a fashion statement might raise as many eyebrows as the proposed price of Google Glass.

The DVF-designed frames with Glass and prescriptive lenses will cost $1,725, while von Furstenberg's sunglasses plus Glass will cost $1,620. The upcoming line up has five new frames and eight shades in two styles. The designs will go on sale June 23, and will be available from online fashion retailer Net-a-Porter and Google itself, according to The Verge.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.