Blog Will Fight Forever 21′s Absurd Legal Threats

Woman wearing leopard-print faux fur vest

Rachel Kane has vowed to fight for her right to make fun of faux fur vests and other Forever foibles. (Photo: Forever 21)

Jenna Sauers of Jezebel reports that Rachel Kane will stand and fight Forever 21′s threat to sue her unless she takes down her blog, which lampoons the fast-fashion retailer several days a week.

And indeed, when I see something like the caveman-meets-drugstore-employee monstrosity at right, I personally can only ask, WTF?

Kane sent Jezebel the following statement, which, although written from her perspective, contains unmistakable scent of lawyer writing:

My site, WTForever21, does not infringe on any of Forever 21′s rights. It contains only criticism, commentary, and news reporting, all written in an educational and humorous manner, which are protected under applicable law. To the extent any of the material used on the site is in fact subject to intellectual property protection (which, in many instances, is by no means clear), the site’s incorporation of that material is a “fair use” under copyright, trademark law, and similar state law. It’s incredibly unlikely that any portion of the site would ever cause confusion in the minds of the general public about whether or not Forever 21 endorses or is affiliated with it. The blog in no way dilutes Forever 21′s trademark, as the company claims. If the company continues to makes threats that have no basis in law, my attorneys are prepared to vigorously defend me and seek all available legal redress against Forever 21.

In the meantime, I am leaving the blog up. I look forward to returning to blogging about fashion atrocities like lime green, faux fur covered vests and candy colored booty shorts on

I’m hoping the last sentence was penned by Kane herself rather than her lawyers. Nothing in law school prepares you for making that kind of unequivocal statement about booty shorts.

Anyway, Kane’s lawyers are right on for the most part. I must, however, register my disagreement with the characterization that it’s “incredibly unlikely” that anything on the site would ever cause confusion about endorsement by or affiliation with Forever 21. “Preposterous” is more like it.

Tags: , , ,

Comments are closed.