This paper is the testimony presented by Narciso Rodriguez before the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property Committee on the Judiciary, in the US House of Representatives. The topic of discussion was whether special provisions were needed to protect unique industries. He was talking on behalf of the Council of Fashion Designers of America. Rodriguez pleads the case of his industry, using his life as an example. He explains the trials and tribulations of his career.

Born to Cuban immigrants , Rodriguez is a true icon of the American dream. He delves into the key aspects that helped him get where he is: a leading American fashion designer, who having previously worked under Donna Karan at Anne Klein, set up his own label in 1998. He explains that his estimated cost of just one 250 piece collection is a little under $6 million. In 1996, Rodriguez rose to fame by designing Carolyn Bessette’s wedding dress when she married John F Kennedy Jr. Pirates copied it and sold about 7-8 million copies, whereas Rodriguez sold only 40 pieces. He says that he spent years perfecting intricacies such as the seams on the dress and it took pirates no time at all to copy the dress when a magazine published the drawings of it. Pirates spend hardly anything creating these copies, they manufacture them in country’s with cheap labor and have them on the shop floor within days. What is striking about this piece is the poignant style in which Rodriguez tells us that his story is not unique, it happens to millions and millions of designers. He draws parallels to fashion copyright in different geographies: In parts of Europe, Japan and India, designers are provided with 15-20 years of protection. Other forms of art such as photography, paintings and music are all protected by copyright law. Rodriguez points out that his form of art uses no less imagination and creativity than the others, so why should it not be given the same protection?

He suggests that congress should not protect all apparel but when it is something that is original or unique, he believes that he or she should have a “small window of protection”. The HR2033 won’t protect people from drawing inspiration from a look, after all, as the designer points out, that is often the mark of success for a designer. He said, “There will be a gigantic public domain of designs that we can all use for inspiration”. Also, consumers would not be the ones who would be prosecuted if they buy these copies, only the manufactures would face legal action against them.

Despite the fact that my argument might not be congruent with Rodriguez’s and I might have a different pe rspective on this issue, this testimony is a very important source for my paper, for it is first hand. I will argue against in my paper against the points that I do not agree with. Rodriguez really touches on all human sensibilities as he narrates his story to get his point across.