The Most Ridiculous Brand Swaggerjacks


Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, or so the old adage goes. When someone tries to bank off your swag, it just means they believe in what you’re doing because it’s working. But sometimes, shit can get a little ridiculous. What started off as simple appropriation can devolve into some ridiculous shit popping off.
While material items like jackets, sneakers or jerseys all have a price tag affixed to them, ideas are priceless. To have one’s ideas swaggerjacked is cold-blooded, especially when the swaggerjacker benefits more than the swaggerjacked. There have been some egregious cases as of late, especially in this day and age where everything is easily accessible if you have a laptop and a solid Wi-Fi connection. However, history shows it ain’t nothing new; these are The Most Ridiculous Brand Swaggerjacks.

Supreme Swaggerjacks Louis Vuitton

When: 2000
Let’s face it; Supreme isn’t the most original of brands. They are original in how they changed the face of streetwear forever. But their actual item designs? Exhibit A: back in 2000, Supreme created “Vuitton” decks, caps and Box Logo T-shirts that (surprise surprise!) completely ripped the Louis Vuitton flower monogram print. Obviously, LV was having none of this and had all items recalled within 2 weeks, making the Supreme Vuitton collection one of these most sought after Supreme items to this date.

Crooks & Castles Swaggerjacks Versace

When: 2003
Versace. Versace? No, Crooks & Castles. The iconic Versace logo that’s represented the brand since it’s founding in the late 70’s is recognisable as soon as you see it. So, when Crooks & Castles came on the scene in 2002, they knew that giving the fashion house logo a street makeover would likely change the game. And it did. Parody tees weren’t as prevalent back in the early 2000’s, and Crooks really ran with this swaggerjacking. So, in hindsight, C&C’s bandana’d up Medusa head was pretty original. So to speak.

Studio D’Artisan Swaggerjacks Levi’s

When: 2007

It’s hard not to emulate the inventor of denim jeans. From the arcuates to the red tab to the patch, Levi’s has been swaggerjacked by many a brand. Studio D’Artisan’s patch—two pigs pulling apart a pair of denim—is only a barnyard animal away from being an exact replica of Levi’s horse-laden patch. Obviously, Levi’s said “enough of that shit” and cease & desisted the Japanese brand, who then exchanged the ripping denim for…mountains.

Wil Fry Swaggerjacks Givenchy

When: 2012
Givenchy’s 2012 “Bird of Paradise” collection completely took over the fashion world. It could be found all the way from the runways to the block corners. Around this time, the Brooklyn Nets were about to make their debut onto the scene and show off their new duds.
Wil Fry decided to take full advantage of the opportunity and kill two birds with on stone, showcasing the “Birds of Paradise” Brooklyn Jersey. This sort of helped to revolutionise two current trends that are being driven to the ground: sublimated jerseys and parody streetwear. But the complete swaggerjacking of Givenchy forced Wil Fry to keep these off the books, only giving them out to friends and family, but still keeping them at the forefront of everyone’s list of items to constantly beg him for.

Givenchy Swaggerjacks Wil Fry

When: 2013
Some may call this a stretch. A hail mary, even. But remember this; Givenchy is 100% aware of Wil Fry’s “Birds of Paradise” Jersey, so their eyes are definitely on what he’s going to do next. Wil’s “Expensive” collection made an appearance in 2012 and, what design do we see Givenchy going H.A.M. with for FW13? This “abstract” one looks eerily similar to Fry’s design sans the names on the tags (for legal reasons, of course.) Is this Givenchy’s way of saying, “Take that, motherfucker!” Another swaggerjacking mystery for the books.

Zara Swaggerjacks Valentino

When: 2013
It should be no shock that a fast-fashion mall brand is completely ripping off a major fashion house, but there has to be some discretion when doing so. Zara blatantly jacked a unique design from Valentino and decided to sell it for $700 less.
But can you blame them? How impractical is a $795 camo sneaker in the first place? So is Zara smart for taking this trendy item and making it way more accessible? You be the judge. But the answer is “yes,” just in case you couldn’t figure it out.

Kate Spade Swaggerjacks Saturdays NYC

When: 2013
Some might say, “There’s not a patent on the word ‘Saturday.'” You know what, man? STFU. Don’t be ignorant. This egregious display from Kate Spade is impermissable. It’s a damn shame when a small, yet highly successful, shop in NYC/Japan is completely jacked off its whole persona to benefit a corporation’s attempt at attracting the hipster chicks who wear expensive beat-up flats and go to hot yoga three times a week.

PYREX VISION Swaggerjacks Rugby Ralph Lauren

When: 2012
When this popped up last year, we thought “Wow, this is ridiculous. RIDICULOUSLY BRILLIANT.” PYREX VISION was on everyone’s radar prior to dropping their first full collection. When they decided to sell $550 flannels, there were definitely a few guffaws here and there, but people copped.
When it was discovered they had bought up the lot of now-extinct Rugby Ralph Lauren flannels, removed the tags and screen printed on the back of them for a 700% mark-up? SHIT. GOT. SERIOUS.
But that’s what’s so ridiculously brilliant. PYREX got away with not only swaggerjacking another brand’s shirts but using units that were heavily on sale and about to go out of business. Then it sold to all the schmucks willing to pay $550 for a screen printed flannel. Amen to PYREX. May both of these flannels rest in peace.

Married to the Mob Swaggerjacks Supreme

When: 2013

If you didn’t have a front row seat to this shit show, you certainly missed a doozy. See if you can follow: Supreme, the king of rip-offs, sues Married to the Mob for capitalising off of their box logo, which they swaggerjacked from Barbara Kruger. While Married to the Mob swaggerjacked the “Supreme Bitch” logo back in 2004, they weren’t sued until 2013 for a whopping $10 million.
This can’t be real life, right? A brand such as Supreme surely wouldn’t jeopardise their “Fuck ’em” attitude to greedily sue someone for something isn’t rightfully theirs, could they? Well, they eventually dropped the suit and are back to just being the king of streetwear and still ripping designs from other brands. Go Supreme!
The article has minor changes for readability and to match our website format.
View Original Article