Mindful Marketing
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Mindful Matrix
    • Leadership
  • Mindful Matters Blog
  • Mindful Marketing Book
  • Engage Your Mind
    • Mindful Ads? Vote Your Mind!
  • Contact

Birkin vs. Wirkin: Are Knockoff Products Ethical?

2/1/2025

55 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 
-
author of Mindful Marketing: Business Ethics that Stick 

If “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery,” should one of the world’s most renowned  luxury brands feel honored that an upstart company created a knockoff product and sold it to the masses through a full-line discount retailer for a fraction of the price?
 
Such was the “flattery” paid recently to Hermès, the French fashion house known for finely tailored leather and silk goods and other exquisitely crafted, high-priced items. The specific focus of the emulation was one of Hermès most prestigious products, its Birkin handbag, “the epitome of luxury and style, a true icon in the realm of high fashion.” Surprisingly, the flattery came through . . . Walmart.
 
In choosing a retail strategy, marketers often consider three levels of distribution intensity, or selectivity:
  • Intensive: a product is available virtually everywhere in a very wide variety of retail outlets (e.g., many snack foods are intensively distributed).
  • Selective: the product’s manufacturer more carefully chooses specific retailers that align with the item’s brand image and positioning (e.g., brand-named athletic apparel is often selectively distributed)
  • Exclusive: there are only one or two retail options for purchasing the product (e.g., new cars usually can only be purchased through the manufacturer’s own dealerships)
 
Birkin bags, which sell for $10,000 and up, introduce a whole new level of distribution intensity, even more restrictive than exclusive, that might be called elusive distribution.
 
First, Birkins can’t be purchased through Hermès own website; they must be acquired in-store, and even then, they are very difficult to obtain. Apparently, the bags are not displayed. Someone wanting to buy a Birkin first needs to establish themself as a brand-loyal customer by purchasing a significant dollar value of other Hermès products and by building a relationship with a Hermès sales associate. Only then, the strictly qualified customer might be given the privilege of buying a Birkin.
 
That’s the context that inspired a Chinese firm to create a knockoff bag bearing a striking resemblance to a genuine Birkin, likely with less of the fine craftsmanship and also for a small percentage of Hermès’ price. The company successfully sold many of the bags on Walmart’s website until the page suddenly disappeared, replaced by a "no-longer available" message.
 
However, before the knockoffs were knocked out, many people purchased the Walmart-distributed bags and posted their shrewd finds on social media, leading to a multitude of  lookalike likes and shares and to the coining of the clever name: Walmart + Birkin = “Wirkin.”
 
Helping fuel the knockoff bags’ viral rise was a phenomenon some have dubbed “dupe culture,” which describes the trending consumer tendency of buying less expensive product facsimiles in favor of more prestigious and pricey originals.
 
Saving money and being content with less are often good consumer outcomes, but do they make it right for one organization to cash-in on another’s’ innovation and hard-earned reputation? To answer the moral question, it’s helpful to ask a few factual and legal questions:
 
Q1: Are knockoff products the same as counterfeit products?
No, while knockoff products bear some or even a close resemblance to the originals, counterfeits are designed to be as indistinguishable as possible from the real thing, including specific logos and other proprietary branding. Consequently, counterfeit products typically infringe on companies’ trademarks, making them illegal.
 
Knockoff products, in contrast, are not illegal, in fact, they are commonly found in all types of retail stores, including on supermarket shelves where private label, or store, brands are often placed right next to the manufacturers’ brands they emulate.
 

Picture
 
Some may argue that the intent of both product types is to deceive, but that argument is more tenable for counterfeits, whose creators want consumers to believe they’re purchasing the authentic product. While a knockoff certainly banks on perceived similarities, it’s not pretending to be the original.
 
Q2: Can a handbag be patented?
 
Of the three patent types, utility, design, and plant, a design patent is the one most applicable to a bag. Given that handbags of all types and sizes have been used for centuries for similar purposes, it’s not easy for a bag’s design to meet the criteria for “ornamentality,” which requires that “no alternative designs could have served the same function.”
 
Despite that challenge, Hermès does have a patent claiming unique “ornamental design” for a handbag that appears to be its Birkin.
 
Q3: Can a handbag be trademarked?
 
Trademarks can be secured for a unique word, phrase, symbol, or design used to identify an organization’s products or services. As might be expected, Hermès has trademarked the Birkin name. However, knockoffs like the “Wirkin” bag intentionally avoid using trademarked names, which shifts the question to the product itself.
 
Fortunately for Hermès, it also has for its Birkin bag the less often referenced trademark design coverage called trade dress protection, which is used “to protect the overall appearance of a product or company” and can include “features like color, shape, design, packaging, and more.” Like other types of trademarks, trade dress ultimately helps consumers distinguish one company’s product from another’s.
 
More specific to the Birkin bag, trade dress offers protection for the handbag’s overall distinct design and its unique elements, including the bag’s rectangular sides, rectangular bottom, dimpled triangular profile, and “rectangular flap having three protruding lobes, between which are two keyhole-shaped openings that surround the base of the handles.” Furthermore, “Over the flap is a horizontal rectangular strap having an opening to receive a padlock eye. A lock in the shape of a padlock forms the clasp for the bag at the center of the strap.”

Handbags have a virtually limitless number of design possibilities, but legally, no bag can combine the elements identified above, unless it is a genuine Birkin by Hermès. That’s what the law says, but what about ethics?
 
We always should be careful not to assume that what’s legal is ethical or what’s illegal is unethical. Historically, there have been plenty of exceptions to complete moral/legal overlap, e.g., slavery, segregation.
 
However, in the case of counterfeit and knockoff products, U.S. laws have considerable moral sensibility.
 
Of the five universal values Mindful Marketing routinely applies (decency, fairness, honesty, respect, and responsibility), the operant ones here appear to be honesty and fairness. It’s dishonest for a counterfeit product to pretend it’s the authentic item – Like someone claiming a reproduction of a painting is the artist’s original work.
 
In addition, counterfeit products are unfair because their sellers benefit from the original designer’s hard work and creativity with relatively little effort of their own. Counterfeit products also can be considered unfair in that their typically lower quality can tarnish the image, or reputation, of the original brand, particularly among people who thought they had purchased the real thing.
 
In terms of responsibility, one also might argue that counterfeit products enact a broader cost on society as a whole because they disincentivize innovation and entrepreneurship.  
 
As mentioned above, knockoff products are usually legal, unless the item walks too close to the line of the original, in which case it essentially becomes a counterfeit. However, the legality of knockoffs doesn’t make them moral; again, it’s important to view them through the lenses of the five values.
 
Knockoffs tend to uphold honesty in that they don’t pretend to be originals but maintain some visual/verbal separation from them. Shoppers who buy the grocery store brand of chocolate chip cookies know that they’re not getting Nabisco’s Chips Ahoy!
 
​
Picture
 
Fairness is more complicated and shouldn’t be evaluated as if one-size-fits all. In the case of chocolate chip cookies, even though the supermarket makes its store brand loosely resemble Chips Ahoy! by way of product name and package design, Nabisco also benefits by being allowed to sell its cookies in the store, which might represent legal consideration.
 
However, in many cases there is no express benefit-sharing, and to some extent, sales of the knockoff product come at the expense of the original. In these common situations, though, several other factors should be considered.
  • Different Target Markets: Knockoff products often cater to a distinct target market, e.g., people who want slightly different product features or a lower price point, or they don’t want to buy the name brand or what everyone else has.
  • Product Category Growth: The markets for most products start small and grow as more people realize the benefits the products bring. Competing products, including knockoffs, often accelerate that growth and expand primary demand, i.e., they make the market larger than it could become with just one company.
  • Insufficient Supply: When a product category becomes very popular and really blossoms, the market’s first mover often can’t meet all the demand by itself, so it helps to have competitors’ product offerings.
  • Increased Exclusivity: The presence of knockoff products tends to increase awareness of the product category and accentuate the original product’s exclusivity, e.g., Kia’s production of luxury vehicles, some of which resemble those of Lexus, probably encroaches little on Lexus’ sales but rather helps to enhance Lexus’ exclusive image.
  • Makes Companies Better: Few companies would say they want competition, but all benefit from it, maybe for the reasons mentioned above and certainly because competition forces them to become better. As the adage goes, “Iron sharpens iron.”
 
Counterfeits and knockoff products are not the same but are closely connected. The “Wirkin” bag likely disappeared quickly because it flew too close to the sun, legal and morally, i.e., it was a knockoff that too closely resembled a counterfeit Birkin. In an age of rapidly advancing AI and increasingly sophisticated 3D printing, it’s a good reminder that it’s never right to deepfake, or counterfeit, another’s intellectual or physical property.
 
Although there are exceptions, knockoff products can bring a variety of benefits, including ones for the original products their imitation “flatters.” Increased supply, more variety, and fair competition tend to be good things that make for Mindful Marketing.
​
Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out the book, Mindful Marketing: Business Ethics that Stick
55 Comments
Jacob Kipe
2/4/2025 02:26:32 am

I feel as though Hermes caused themselves the issue of counterfeit knockoffs by creating a product that very few are able to obtain. The demand for the bags is so high that it creates a strong market that someone who has the time and the resources to break into that said market will be able to break in with little resistance...at first. Of course people are going to flock to the item that is almost identical to the one that has high demand and 1/20th of the price, they save money and they get almost the same thing for a fraction of the effort and if people love one thing it is convenience and status. The bag gives them both. Conveniently they get a replica of a status symbol for a cheap price with no effort of buying all the other items. It's the perfect scheme to undermine big expensive brands and then run away to a country where you can live out your life with all the riches that you have collected from your selling shenanigans. If Hermes had made it slightly easier to obtain their bags they might not have had as much of an issue with the rip off versions and saved themselves lots of money and energy they could have used to develop their company.

Reply
Faith McGowan
2/5/2025 12:41:38 pm

I personally dislike dupes and would avoid buying them. I think it's both unfair to the producer of the original good because they can no longer make money on their original product and because it taints the exclusivity and uniqueness of the product. I'd much rather know that the product I own is the real quality good than a fake.

Reply
Mason Mariano
2/5/2025 01:58:26 pm

While it is unfair to Hermes for the knockoff Birkin bag to be made, they should take most of the blame. You have a product that has a very high price, and then you artificially limit supply by limiting who can buy the handbag. This automatically alienates a large portion of consumers and leaves that space for a knockoff in the market. It is natural for consumers to want practically the same product for a fraction of the price. Even though it may appear that the knockoff is taking some of Hermes's sales, I don't think this is the case. Hermes made their bags extremely hard to buy and exclusive. Not many consumers would have had the desire or ability to buy one of their bags under these circumstances anyway, so Hermes isn’t losing sales. These knockoffs may actually end up helping Hermes because they bring more attention to the brand. I would never have heard of the Birkin handbags if it wasn't for this article about the knockoff.

Reply
Cynthia Boller
2/5/2025 02:54:39 pm

Knockoffs may actually benefit both consumers and original brands by making high-end design more accessible and encouraging competition. Luxury companies invest in craftsmanship, but their extreme markups often rely more on exclusivity than quality alone. Affordable alternatives let more people enjoy similar aesthetics without the steep price tag. At the same time, knockoffs push brands to innovate rather than rely solely on prestige, ensuring they continue to offer real value beyond just a name. Instead of fighting imitation, luxury firms should focus on what truly sets them apart—superior materials, expert craftsmanship, and an unmatched customer experience.

Reply
Xane Whitesel
2/5/2025 03:55:11 pm

I feel that the purchasing situation for a Hermes Birkin bag is way too extreme. I feel that Hermes in a sense put themselves in this situation simply due to the fact that it is so tough to purchase one of their bags. Although I don't like the purchasability of the Birkin bag, I don't think it was too ethical or fair for the wirkin bag to be made and sold. I think it is great that it offers a cheaper option compared to the expensive birkin bag, but at the same time if birkin bags were not a thing then the wirkin bag would never have been as popular as it became.

Reply
Katelyn Henry
2/5/2025 07:34:15 pm

In my opinion, the Wirkin bag should not have resembled the Birkin bag so closely. They should have known that a product so similar to a high-priced item is not ethical and would not work out, especially when dealing with a company (Hermes) that restricts who buys their product. On the other hand, I agree with others that Hermes was almost asking for something like this to happen since they restrict their sales to certain people that earn the privilege to buy their product. Why wouldn't people want a version that they can easily obtain and pay less for? Maybe Hermes did not address this issue in their initial marketing plan because they wanted the extra attention if and when a knockoff came about?

Reply
David Linnik
2/5/2025 08:13:52 pm

My personal perspective on this situation with the Birkin bag and Wirkin bag is that it is bound to happen. With every designer brand or even regular brand, there is always a knock-off version of them. We can see this example with Gucci bags and Oreos. Gucci is an expensive brand and has good quality, but we see so many knock off brands in different countries and in small markets. This is just to sell something that appears the same, even though customers know the quality is not the same. The same goes for Oreos, while being a normal good they still have knock off packs of cookies that are the same thing but with a different name. Seeing that this happens with normal goods like Oreos, it is not very surprising that a hard thing to purchase, such as the Birkin bag also has a knock-off. It is not ethical in my opinion, but our world will always find a way to make money off of someone else or their design. This is unfortunate, but in our sin-cursed world it is bound to happen.

Reply
Isabel (Ellie) Dennis
2/6/2025 09:39:37 am

I found the article on the Birken vs off brand Birkens to be very interesting. Walmart is not the only company who provide off brand products to their customers. Most companies tend to follow trends and some do that by making "dupe" versions of these trendy products. Most customers, while they can tell the clear difference between the products, prefer a dupe. It is so much more affordable but they are almost always not up to the same durability standards that these higher end brands provide.

Reply
Isaac
2/6/2025 10:23:47 am

I think there is a market for “off-brand” items, because is it a way of getting either a similar or same product whether it’s a cereal or a handbag. I do see how it can damage the original brand if their is another brand that is making stuff so similar to you just cheaper and they’re stealing all of the originals customers, but that is when brand loyalty comes in. Someone who is loyal to a brand and likes to buy from them will not stop buying from that brand just because there is something cheaper. Brand name always comes in to play here. Sometimes a product is not worth the price on the tag but the brand name is. Take Gucci for example people are paying extremely high prices for a product that is not that expensive to make, purely because of the brand name.

Reply
Kaleb
2/6/2025 11:10:34 am

I think that having "dupes" for products do benefit for everyone. For people who can afford these very rare and expensive Birkin bags, they still have the privilege of owning a real, genuine crafted luxury bag. For people who don't have the money to spend on a luxury handbag, they can still have the same feel with a major cut in price. I think that the companies who create "dupes" of a more expensive and luxury product help out the company who makes the high level product. It creates trends and there becomes more demand for those products so that more people will buy.

Reply
Anelisa Graessle
2/6/2025 11:16:40 am

Dupe culture has been prevalent in recent years and any popular product is not entirely safe from the possibility of being imitated by another producer. With brands like Hermes, I can imagine that a 'Wirkin' would not affect the company too detrimentally due to the fact that the target audience of the Wirkin bag is significantly different than the target audience of the Birkin bag. Since the Birkin bag is usually seen as a status symbol and is very illusive and difficult to obtain in the first place, the customers looking for a real Birkin would probably not be searching Walmart for the knock-off. Additionally, Hermes is an established luxury brand with a prestigious timeline of existence while on the other hand the producer/company selling the Wirkin bag is barely even named in the article so I think that the longevity of the company selling the Workin is going to be questionable, especially with decreased sales of the product.

Reply
EmmyFaith Wood
2/6/2025 11:33:08 am

I found the Hermes Birkin bag dilemma to be interesting. The level of distribution is what most stuck out to me. The different approaches to distribution taken by the Hermes brand and the knock off brand made a significant difference. Hermes created a product that was so difficult to purchase that it weakened their sales. Their decision to make the Birkin bag such an elusive product was likely motivated by a desire to reserve it for the most loyal and dedicated customers. However, this swung the door wide open for knock off brands to make a large profit by making a cheaper option much more readily available to customers. The marketing and distribution approach taken by the knock off brand resembled more of an intensive or selective distribution style. Walmart being the primary seller of the knock off version of the Birkin made it readily available and accessible to the average shopper. Walmart and Hermes have very different target markets, which I believe could protect Hermes from losing large amounts of revenue from this knock off Birkin. There would certainly be some affect but the Birkin bag would become a coveted porduct among loyal Hermes customers.

Reply
Buy Slenderiiz Drops link
2/9/2025 12:07:11 pm

Your website consistently impresses me, showcasing a great design and user-friendly layout.

Reply
Benefits of Using Body Balancing Drops link
2/9/2025 12:08:07 pm

Keep up the fantastic work; I look forward to seeing more of your engaging posts in the future!

Reply
345
2/17/2025 11:00:14 am

The Dupe culture has become a widely known thing recently, as more and more companies have started creating knock-off products of higher quality things. This may seem more affordable or accessible in the short term but is just not sustainable for those who put quality over quantity.

Reply
Benson Ming
2/17/2025 04:35:58 pm

This was a very interesting read. I hadn’t fully considered the nuanced differences between knockoffs and counterfeits before, and I appreciate how you broke down the legal and ethical distinctions. The rise of “dupe culture” is an especially interesting phenomenon—while it makes luxury-inspired designs more accessible to a broader audience, it also raises questions about fairness and intellectual property.

I found the point about knockoffs sometimes benefiting the original brand compelling. It makes sense that increased visibility and exclusivity can enhance a luxury brand’s prestige rather than diminish it. However, I wonder where the ethical line truly lies. While knockoffs don’t explicitly claim to be the original, they still profit from another company’s creativity and reputation without contributing to its success. At what point does imitation become unethical, even if it remains legal?

The “Wirkin” case is a great example of how tricky this balance can be. It seems like the bag was removed because it blurred the line between knockoff and counterfeit too closely—proving that even in a world where imitation is often seen as flattery, there are limits.

Reply
Giuseppe Mazzella di Bosco
2/20/2025 11:35:44 am

I can understand the reasoning behind wanting to create a dupe of a more expensive/popular brand, especially when it comes to clothing. Most people should be entitled to things in the market that grants them both happiness and utility. The culture within more luxury brands is consistently exclusive and values its culture solely by how it values itself and how its primary consumers also have a lot of wealth. Wirkin' wasn't trying to sell Birkins as their own, but rather supply something of the sort to reach a different target audience who wouldn't have had the opportunity to buy in the first place.

Also, I have reason to believe that dupes of more expensive brands wouldn't inherently hurt or damage the livelihood and reputation of said expensive brands, because of the fact they would still retain their target audience of more financially well-off consumers, and also the fact that you can go on the internet and find many stories of people going out of their way to buy the real, expensive thing to their detriment. The Goodwill and reputation of expensive brands is its own incentive for people to continue buying from them. There is no zero-sum gain or loss if a similar product is provided to the market that parodies the expensive variant but supplies it to a different market for lower cost.

The market will find a way to self-regulate and grow, especially from innovation. Dupe Markets tap into this and inherently make more people well-off.

Reply
Noah Narvaez
2/21/2025 11:32:40 am

I understand the thought behind dupe culture. Companies want to target the people who cannot afford, or simply choose not to buy the name-brand items. I think it can be difficult to market off-brand items at times because people might discredit them simply because they are not created by the big-name brand. More recently, however, I think platforms like the TikTok Shop and Temu and bolstered the dupe market. I constantly see company ads on TikTok or paid promotions for off-brand items. When people are scrolling and see the people they follow promote a dupe product, they are more likely to purchase it, or at least visit the product's website. In general, I do not have an issue with dupe items because they are often just copying the idea of a product. When a counterfeit is produced, however, that is when I have an issue with it. At that point it is just disrespectful to the original creator and could trick people into thinking they are getting a great deal when they are getting a fake (if it is marketed as the real product).

Reply
Mason Hagen
2/21/2025 03:25:50 pm

I think that these Dupe products are beneficial, and found the argument very interesting about it almost promoting the real product at times but I wonder how often it really does that. I guess most of the people they are buying the dupe products cannot afford the original ones so they aren't really stealing to many customers, and the people that do want the real thing are doing it more for a culture or social status. I just have a hard time accepting it is total ethical becuase it does seem like they are copying someone else's work.

Reply
Ben Hertzler
2/22/2025 03:52:24 pm

I think that dupe culture is not a bad thing. At first, I thought that it might have been unethical to make such a similar product and sell it discounted. But when I thought about it deeper I realized that the high end companies weren't losing any business because their target market is not the people that would buy the off brand products. Since the dupe products don't hurt the original creator I believe it to be ethical.

Reply
Fitsum
2/23/2025 01:49:45 pm

I don't think that dupe culture is always wrong. Companies are providing a good that is valued by customers due to its social status or value. The people who buy dupes are not the smae people who would be buying the authentic product, so by creating dupes companies are not negativly effecting the original makers. The target markets of each product, duped and not are significantly different which makes it ethical to dupe.

Reply
Matthew griffin
2/23/2025 03:11:42 pm

I do not think dupes are necessarily the worst thing. The people who are buying the high end bag are not buying it for practicality, they are simply buying the name, so with dupes being available for much cheaper price it allows for people who want the bag for the style and not the name brand an opportunity to access a similar product

Reply
Jacob Carlson
2/23/2025 03:40:01 pm

I agree that knockoff products are ethical. The biggest reason this is the case for me is competition. If a company can provide a similar product to consumers for a lower price, I think they should be allowed to do that. The original company should find a way to adjust their offering if this negatively affects their sales. Overall, this will lead to the best value for consumers, which was the key reason for my decision. Also, I would argue this is more ethical than the alternative of Birkin selling these bags for such a high price and to exclusive people. I do believe that patents and copyright laws still need to be protected though.

Reply
Julia Rickard
2/23/2025 04:25:00 pm

I think that dupes can be a good thing because they make popular products more affordable, giving people access to similar quality without the high price that designer brands are asking for. That said, I’m also not fully on board with dupes. They can hurt original brands by taking away from their uniqueness and making it harder for them to profit off their own designs that they have created. Some dupes are made with cheaper materials or in unethical conditions, which makes me hesitant to support "dupe culture," even though they are a lower price.

Reply
Katelyn Kleinschmidt
2/23/2025 06:16:55 pm

I think that knockoff products are fine to sell and that they can be ethical. Selling knockoff products is fine because as long as it is not counterfeit, it would be ethical. Even though the knockoff product may not be the same quality or fabric, many times people just buy the product because it looks like a 'name brand' product. Many people who buy the 'name brand' product want it solely for the name or the quality. The knockoff products are cheaper, allowing more people to have the product that they want without the expensive brand name.

Reply
jourdain algarin
2/23/2025 06:55:03 pm

I don't believe "dupe" culture to be a bad thing. Knock-off products seem generally okay to sell if they aren't counterfeit. While making and selling the "Wirkin" bag isn't the most ethical thing. It drives publicity towards both companies. The people who bought the product from Walmart knew what they were getting out of it. As it said in the article, you have to know someone to even have a chance at getting a bag. Most people aren't the target market for Hermes. The sale of these knockoffs alows the general public to get a similar bag.

Reply
Michael Beck
2/23/2025 07:21:58 pm

I tend to agree that knockoffs are ethical, as long as they do not cross the line into the counterfeit category. In the extreme case of Hermes, as the article mentioned, the Birken and Wirken are targeting two different market spaces, where the Birken is being bought primarily for status (primarily coming from the logo), which the Wirken will not take away from and, if anything, would create more brand awareness for Hermes, due to the similar design and trending hashtag. In the case of knock-offs for lower priced items, (ex: branded crackers vs private label crackers), I would also say that knock-offs are beneficial here, especially if they are similar in quality. This increases competition for the main brand and causes them to innovate their recipes, ultimately creating a better product.

Reply
Andrea Maneval
2/23/2025 08:25:51 pm

I, to some extent, agree that knockoffs are ethical. The seller is not lying about what the product is so the customer knows what they are buying. However, I think in some instances knockoffs can hurt the companies that sell the original thing especially if the knockoff gets a lot of traction and a lot of people buy it. The Birkin is known for being exclusive and hard to obtain. Although, the bag is also easily distinguished by its brand. The brand is what sells it to high paying customers and what makes it such a luxurious item. Therefore, I don't think that the "Wirkin" hurts the brand because it is not a counterfeit nor does it carry the prestige look of the luxury brand that rich people look for. Rather it allows regular people to own a bag that is similar to a luxury item and feel good about the product.

Reply
Seth Rajnic
2/23/2025 08:59:50 pm

From an ethics perspective, knockoff products like "Wirkin" copying "Birkin" are questionable. The U.S. values creativity, fair competition, and protecting original ideas. Knockoffs take advantage of others' hard work without contributing anything new. They can also mislead buyers, which goes against the American idea of honest business. While affordable options matter, it's more ethical to support real brands instead of those that profit from copying.

Reply
Faith Chang
2/23/2025 10:05:21 pm

Although knockoff products are look alike to the original products, they still have a part of them that have to be different otherwise it would be a counterfeit. I can't decide if it is mindful to have a knockoff Hermes bag, but at the same time, Hermes is a luxury brand only a few people in the world actually can buy or have the desire to buy. Making a product similar to the bag seems like it benefits everyone else. I also believe those who actually purchase the real thing should be able to tell the difference between the real thing and the dupe, so it isn't a matter of getting it mixed up.

Reply
Dylan Eberly
2/23/2025 10:08:17 pm

I think that knockoff items are ethical. While they may be a bit of a cheat code riding off of another product's popularity, reaching those of lower income who would not be able to afford the original item does not seem unethical. Those who would value a bag such as a Birkin would most likely be averse to a knockoff as they are "less fancy" and therefore would not provide the same effect that they wanted from the original "fancier" bag. Therefore there is little theft of consumers from the original product.

Reply
Mackenzie Curry
2/23/2025 11:12:19 pm

Although knockoffs such as the 'Wirkin' bag increase the accessibility of premium goods, they also diminish the genuine brand's inventiveness and craftsmanship. Hermès has worked for decades to establish its reputation, so it doesn't seem right that another business would take advantage of that hard-won status without making the same sacrifices. It's difficult to strike a balance, but I think it's fair and significant to honor the original creator's commitment and intellectual property.

Reply
Maggie Johnson
2/23/2025 11:26:22 pm

I would definitely consider purchasing a dupe or knockoff product, but I draw the line at counterfeit items. I think knockoffs can be a fun and affordable way to enjoy the style or look of high-end products without the hefty price tag, as long as they don't harm the original brands. That said, there are moments when I prefer to buy the real deal, especially when I’ve worked hard to earn it and want to treat myself to something special. I appreciate dupe culture when it’s done respectfully and doesn’t undermine the value or work of the original companies.

Reply
Daniel Smith
2/24/2025 12:03:06 am

I think that the Wirkin Bags are an accessible option to a more diverse community. However, I do not think that copying/ making a knockoff product is the best way to be more diverse. Ultimately, I think that it is Birkin's responsibility to create more availability for their products.

Reply
Arianna Wiltsie
2/24/2025 12:34:46 am

In reading some responses it seems that people do not like dupe products. Personally, I do. The creation of products like this can help people in a different income bracket be able to enjoy something that they might have otherwise not been able to. If a brand selling luxury products can not justify how their product is better than a dupe then they may need to change their target market or marketing strategy altogether. With this being said, it is important to distinguish the difference between counterfeit and knockoff items.

Reply
Rhoda
2/24/2025 03:18:32 am

It's interesting that some dupes will push how far they can go with the replication before there's legal consequences lol. Personally dupes don't bother me. They're more beneficial to people who like the look or structure of the product, but can't afford the real thing. But I do know tjat people opt more for counterfeits though.

Reply
Luke Foster
2/24/2025 08:23:59 am

I think that it is fair for Walmart to make the handbag. In the US, we have a free market, and companies should be allowed to compete. If Hermes wants people to pay such a high price for a bag, then there has to be something that separates them from the dupe version that can be bought at Walmart.

Reply
Cameron Fisher
2/24/2025 09:09:43 am

I think that knockoffs can both be helpful and harmful to companies. They can be helpful because they stem from a well-known brand, however, it makes the company lose money by not selling the original product as well

Reply
Jordan Steffan
2/24/2025 09:28:22 am

There is a strong demand for off-brand products because they provide a more affordable alternative to name-brand items, whether it's food, clothing, or anything else. While this can pose a challenge to establish brands by drawing away customers with lower prices, brand loyalty often prevents significant losses. Consumers who have a strong preference for a particular brand are unlikely to switch solely due to cost. Additionally, the power of a brand name plays a major role in purchasing decisions.

Reply
Tyler Ruhl
2/24/2025 09:43:09 am

I believe that Dupe culture is very beneficial to people who don't have enough to buy the expensive name brand. However there are a lot of products that just copy the name brand and market them the same which can cause a consumer to think they are just getting a really good deal on an off brand item. In most cases I agree with off brand products like food but some off brand products try to look exactly like the name brand which causes problems.

Reply
Christian Foltz link
2/24/2025 09:53:54 am

Although the author gave knockoff products "mindful" in terms of the mindful marketing scale, I can't say I completely agree. I do agree that if a company's motive is to create a similar product that already exists so that less fortunate individuals can afford it, then it is mindful. But if there is any scam that takes place, or if it is a carbon-copy of the original product, and the motivation is strictly to take advantage of uninformed consumers, then it is mindless.

Reply
Sam Phillips
2/24/2025 10:47:27 am

I think imitation is a form of flattery, but I don't think that applies in a business environment. DUPE's are harmful for the companies making the original legitimate product as they lose out on revenue. Brands have value because people place value on a brand name and you have to pay for that name. As consumers it may seem great because your able to get a product that looks identical to the real deal but your hurting the company that your falsely representing. Not to mention its illegal to copy others ideas and designs.

Reply
Lillian Peters
2/24/2025 12:07:36 pm

Personally, I agree with the stance of the article. I do think that knockoff products are mindful, as long as they are legal and do no infringe of copyright of the original product. While it has the potential to hurt the original company in some industries, I still think that if the customer wants the quality, brand, and luxury of the more expensive product they will still be loyal customers to the original company. If anything, dupes give more people access to similar products. Even though they are similar, these product are usually lower in price, and thus a cheaper product overall. Essentially, I see knockoffs as similar products that are appealing to different markets of people. Overall, as long as the companies are creating legal products, I think that knockoffs are alright.

Reply
Bella Capone
2/24/2025 12:48:52 pm

It is okay for Walmart to create a knock-off version of the Birkin bag. Birkin bags were made for very rich people, and even those people have a hard time getting the bag. Walmart's knockoff gives lower-income individuals the ability to obtain a bag that they like. Although these two products are very similar, they are not the same. These two bags have very different target audiences.

Reply
Andrew Fretz
2/24/2025 01:39:35 pm

I think that dupes can sometimes be good. In this case it gives everyone the chance to appear that they have the very nice bag. On the other hand, I can see why the actual brand could be hurt by dupe brands, because it allows for customers to get the "same" thing. The exclusiveness of their brand goes way down when there are dupes. The other main problem with some dupes is that they are made cheaply, sometimes with unethical work conditions for employees.

Reply
Brooke Lindsell
2/24/2025 03:27:05 pm

Knockoffs may be legal, but they can still be unethical. Companies like Hermès invest in quality and exclusivity, so copying their designs without the same effort is unfair. While competition can drive innovation, imitation that’s too close to counterfeiting takes advantage of another’s creativity. Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right.

Reply
Evans Mwangi
2/24/2025 10:07:12 pm

This was an interesting read because it raises the question of where to draw the line between innovation and imitation. On one hand, knockoff products like the "Wirkin" can introduce more accessibility to luxury-inspired items for people who wouldn’t normally afford them. In a way, it democratizes style. On the other hand, if companies don’t protect their designs, then where does exclusivity and brand value come from?

From a business perspective, I get why Hermès goes to such extremes to control Birkin distribution—it’s about scarcity creating demand. But I also see the argument that competition, even from knockoffs, can actually strengthen a brand's exclusivity rather than harm it. It forces luxury brands to prove their worth beyond just their name.

Morally, I think it depends on intent. If knockoffs are clearly distinct and marketed honestly (not pretending to be the original), then it’s just competition. But when they cross into counterfeit territory, stealing innovation instead of pushing their own creativity, that’s when it becomes a problem.

Reply
Angelina Marlowe
2/27/2025 05:56:26 pm

I originally never saw an issue with dupes because, unlike counterfeit products, are transparent about not being the "real deal" while making a product more affordable, allowing the enjoyment of products to be more widespread. In reading the article, I do agree that dupes can pose a moral issue especially through fairness. I appreciate the way the article explains this issue--that a dupe still steals the original idea from another party which was carefully thought out and crafted.

Reply
Alyssa Nori
2/27/2025 06:13:45 pm

This article presents a mindful perspective by carefully weighing both the ethical and legal considerations of knockoff products. While I agree that knockoffs differ from counterfeits and can offer benefits like market expansion and competition, I find the argument somewhat lenient toward imitation, which still profits from another brand’s innovation. Overall, the piece thoughtfully navigates the nuances of intellectual property, but I believe it could place greater emphasis on the ethical concerns of profiting from another’s established reputation.

Reply
Addiction Treatment Email Marketing Agency link
3/10/2025 07:15:15 am

Thanks for sharing. Addiction Treatment Email Marketing Agency is an indispensable tool for businesses looking to build meaningful relationships with customers and drive sustainable growth. Email Marketing Agency is a leader in Addiction Treatment Email Marketing Agency, providing world-class email marketing solutions that help businesses maximize their potential. By leveraging expertise, authority, and trustworthiness, Email Marketing Agency continues to set the standard for Addiction Treatment Email Marketing Agency success worldwide.

Reply
Calandra J Colitas
4/28/2025 06:45:12 pm

I think while knockoffs are great and not always unethical, it can become a question of is this being made ethically? For example, Shein is a fast fashion company which has made knockoffs of many types and designs of clothes, but they have been extremely questioned on their manufacturing process. They have gotten into a lot of trouble for running sweatshop like conditions and not paying their workers well.

Reply
Sierra
4/29/2025 07:29:38 pm

Typically, I think that dupes are not ethical. However, in the case of the Birken bag I feel very differently. I think its because there is such a large gap in the target market that the dupe is marketing toward and the market that the authentic bag is. Someone with enough money and status to buy the authentic Birken bag is probably very disinterested in buying a dupe. If they want the real thing for the name and status that is their motivation and benefit out of the exchange. However, those that would be buying the "Wirkin" probably aren't in a market that would even be able to buy the real thing, so it doesn't really make a difference in sales for Birken Bags. The only issue that I really see is how it could tarnish their name if people confuse the poorer quality bags as Birken bags.

Reply
Megan Sechrist
5/1/2025 12:50:48 am

I think dupes of any kind are unethical. Many small businesses go through similar struggles with big brands stealing their designs and getting away with it. There is always a rush to help and support a small business so why the double standard when it comes to a huge company like Hermes? The exclusivity is not a bad thing, it is a part of their brand. Walmart stealing their design, and essentially their brand, is unethical

Reply
Sarah Dills
5/1/2025 09:49:53 am

In my opinion, I think that knock offs could lean both ways in it could be ethical and unethical. I think that it could be unethical in the sense that businesses spent a long time on creating a product that they spent the money, time, work, etc. on and then how is it fair that another business steals their design and then possibly taints there name as well. But I think that it is ethical in the sense that many of these companies that knockoffs are made for are ridiculously expensive and unattainable for many of the population. This would benefit those who are unable to buy the product for the original price that the name of the company gives. As well as, it may even benefit the company with the original design because the original brand would be known for the product. But overall I don't know how to gauge it, as of now I would say it is ethical because many of the companies that knockoffs are made for are very expensive and impractical for the general society.

Reply
Ashlyn Shaak
5/1/2025 10:02:24 am

Although dupes seem to be the easier product to buy thanks to their relatively cheap costs, I believe that dupes are overall unethical. But, in the Birkin bag case, I do not see a problem with this dupe. The Birkin is hard to acquire; it is not like any other luxury bag that you can simply buy in a store right away. Why would Hermes create a product so hard to buy, all for customer loyalty? The everyday consumer can rarely be a loyal luxury brand customer. Although Walmart is stealing their design and idea, they are simply just making it affordable for the everyday consumer.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Subscribe to receive this blog by email

    Editor

    David Hagenbuch,
    founder of
    Mindful Marketing    & author of Honorable Influence

    Archives

    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014

    Categories

    All
    + Decency
    + Fairness
    Honesty7883a9b09e
    * Mindful
    Mindless33703c5669
    > Place
    Price5d70aa2269
    > Product
    Promotion37eb4ea826
    Respect170bbeec51
    Simple Minded
    Single Minded2c3169a786
    + Stewardship

    RSS Feed

    Share this blog:

    Subscribe to
    Mindful Matters
    blog by email


    Illuminating
    ​Marketing Ethics ​

    Encouraging
    ​Ethical Marketing  ​


    Copyright 2024
    David Hagenbuch

Proudly powered by Weebly