Costco lululemon concept
oasisamuel/Depositphotos.com

July 9, 2025

Are Costco’s Lululemon Dupes Counterfeit?

Lululemon Athletica is suing Costco for selling alleged knockoff versions of its activewear in what appears to be a maneuver to better police “dupe culture.”

Dupes, or cheaper look-alikes of high-end styles, have long been a mainstay of the fashion cycle — particularly with the spread of private labels — but are getting more attention as they’re now widely hyped as bargains on TikTok and Instagram.

“Such items used to be called knockoffs. They used to be embarrassing,” Washington Post reporter Maura Judkis wrote in 2023. But now, “influencers and aggregators crow about their finds as ‘an incredible dupe for Hailey Bieber’s party dress,’ or ‘a perfect dupe for Kate Middleton’s’ red Alexander McQueen coat.’”

The knockoffs are reportedly made possible by the Copyright Act of 1976 that found copyright law doesn’t extend to ideas, procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles or discoveries.

“Broadly speaking, it’s really easy and oftentimes completely legally aboveboard for companies to copy the design of garments, and oftentimes accessories as well, because [intellectual property] law generally doesn’t like to give monopolies to single companies for useful things,” Julie Zerbo, a lawyer and the founder of the Fashion Law, recently told The Washington Post.

Lululemon Accuses Costco of Illegally Trading on its ‘Reputation, Goodwill and Sweat Equity’

In the lawsuit, however, Lululemon said that “given the success” of its products, “some companies have replicated or copied Plaintiffs’ proprietary apparel designs to create what are colloquially known in the fashion world as ‘knockoffs’ or ‘dupes.’”

“The Infringing Products create an improper association with Plaintiffs’ authentic products,” the complaint continued, citing the example of the hashtag “LululemonDupes” on social media, which helps users find reviews and sources of similar products at a lower price.

The lawsuit accuses Costco of illegally trading on Lululemon’s “reputation, goodwill and sweat equity by selling unauthorized and unlicensed apparel” based on the athleisure brand’s design patents.

The alleged knockoffs include versions of Lululemon’s Scuba hoodies and sweatshirts, Define jackets, and ABC pants under Costco’s Kirkland Signature brand — in addition to third-party brands including Danskin, Jockey, and Spyder sold at a fraction of Lululemon’s price.

The suit cites specific design details on some items that allegedly violate patents, but also consumer confusion caused by dupes. Lululemon cited articles from The New York Times and The Washington Post calling Costco’s products “dupes” of Lululemon’s and said that the similar designs could confuse buyers into thinking that Lululemon made them for Costco’s private label.

“Indeed, one of the purposes of selling ‘dupes’ is to confuse consumers” into believing that they are the authentic products, the lawsuit claimed.

Lululemon further argued that Costco’s ambiguity about the manufacturers of Kirkland products lead some customers to believe that the Kirkland-branded products are made by the same manufacturers as the original products.

Costco hasn’t responded to the lawsuit.

The Question: ‘Where Does Inspiration End and Imitation Begin?’

An article on Marketplace said proving design patents have been violated is difficult because the matter is often subjective. The article stated, “Is a Ford Bronco a dupe of a Jeep? Is Pepsi a dupe of Coke? Where does inspiration end and imitation begin?”

Christopher Durham, president of the Velocity Institute, a consulting firm focused on private label strategy, told Marketplace that copycats lead to more options and lower prices for consumers while often inspiring the next trend.

He said, “If you look across all of retail, 95% of all things are duplicates, 5% are innovation.”

Elizabeth Dipchand, an intellectual property lawyer and managing partner of Dipchand LLP, nonetheless told CBC that while lookalike product has been around for decades, the expanding market for dupes could lead other premium brands to file similar lawsuits.

She said, “[Costco is not a] counterfeit manufacturer from overseas that trickles in counterfeit bags and… shoes and all sorts of other goods. This is a very well-known multinational with significant bricks and mortar affecting the bottom line of another very, very well-known higher end and higher priced company.”

Discussion Questions

Does Costco appear to be crossing the line in developing product that closely resembles Lululemon’s offerings?

Do you think the online frenzy over dupes, particularly in the fashion space, calls for legal action by those being mimicked?

Poll

21 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Neil Saunders

I have only ever looked at the Costco product in store and I have not undertaken a detailed assessment. However, from my cursory and amateur examination I would say that the products are similar but far from direct copies. There may be some remedy against similarity under trade dress protection, but I think it is very obvious to the consumer that Costco is not selling Lululemon products nor is it trying to pass off its garments as being from Lululemon. I also think Lululemon has potentially shot itself in the foot as it has merely drawn attention to Costco. People are now thinking “wow, I can get a hoodie for $8 rather than $118 at Lululemon” and they are questioning why Lulu products cost so much in the first place. That’s not exactly a win in the court of public opinion.

Last edited 4 months ago by Neil Saunders
Georganne Bender
Georganne Bender
Famed Member
Reply to  Neil Saunders

Costco now sells Banana Republic branded apparel in its stores. And every time I see it, I think, naaaa. There’s no way you’d ever see that on a Banana Republic sales floor.

Robin Mallory
Robin Mallory

Just looked at Costco site out of curiosity of BR brand. 10 apparel items $15-$22. “value” mentioned in reviews… but also quality & judgement of the Costco Buyers in question “It’s great seeing more brands open up to Costco, but if this is the quality we can expect, I’ll just go to the actual department stores.”

Ebony Menge
Ebony Menge
Reply to  Robin Mallory

I get paid over 220 Dollars per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. i never thought i’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 15k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do, check it out by Visiting Following Website…
.
.
HERE—————⊃⫸ https://rb.gy/20rv69

Last edited 3 months ago by Ebony Menge
SophiaButlin
SophiaButlin
Member
Reply to  Robin Mallory

Google is now paying $300 to $500 per hour for doing work online work from home. Last paycheck of me said that $20537 from this easy and simple job. Its amazing and earns are awesome. No boss, full time freedom and earnings are in front of you. This job is just awesome. Every person can makes income online with google easily….
.
M­­­­­­o­­­­­­r­­­­­­e­ D­­­­­­e­­­­­­t­­­­­­a­­­­­­i­­­­­­l­­­­­­s For Us→→→→ https://tinyurl.com/mr8pnsb6

Last edited 3 months ago by SophiaButlin
Neil Saunders
Famed Member

Yes, these are very different products to those in an actual BR store – especially nowadays since their mini revamp!

Craig Sundstrom
Craig Sundstrom

Not even one pic?!?! Howinthehell can we judge without one? Anyway, I have a couple issues with the claims made here. First, with all due respect to Ms. Judkis, I don’t think knockoffs were ever “embarassing”: OTC being able to fool friends and family – successfully – was a compliment to all concerned …buyer, seller…even the knockoffee, as it was a complment to the strength of their brand. (What was embarassing was not being successful at it.) Second, I think it’s more accurate to say the copyright law codified existing practice and Common Law, rather than “made it possible”. As for who is right here, I’ll leave that to the Courts(s) to decide… presumably the Discovery Phase will be illustrated.

Last edited 4 months ago by Craig Sundstrom
Carlos Arámbula
Carlos Arámbula

Costco isn’t doing anything different from what large department stores are already doing with their private label fitness clothing.

I understand the importance of protecting the Lululemon brand. However, in this case, Lululemon is being held up as the gold standard — the benchmark that all fitness wear aspires to. That’s a powerful position.

Lululemon should embrace this role and continue to invest in its brand to maintain and grow its value. While not everyone can afford Lululemon products, the aspiration to own them only strengthens the brand’s desirability and perceived worth.

Doug Garnett

This will be an interesting lawsuit to keep track of as there is a great degree of perception and interpretation involved. The most interesting part, for me, was the I’ve read that the lawsuit includes a claim it is well known that private label products are usually or often made by the original manufacturer. A finding on that claim could upend a great deal of retail effort. I am also struck that the products specifically named are mostly sold under traditional brands – Danskin, Spyder, Jockey, and Hi-Tec. Lululemon has thrown a bomb into the middle of how modern retail operates. Everyone in retail should follow the case closely.

Robin Mallory
Robin Mallory
Reply to  Doug Garnett

If the general public is aware of ‘white labeling’ (and other less-than-transparent producer vs the final label attached), I would think it would be known most in CPG category.

“Brand” vs IP is getting stickier over the years. The more companies that go bankrupt & sell IP, the less clear if a re-emergence is via a retailer or PE

Danskin brand –> owner Iconix Brand Group–> bought by PE Lancer Capital.
Jockey on the other hand, may still be family owned, but globalization means lots of licensing deals.

But Lululemon is different in that it’s a CURRENT strong brand and has clearly acknowledged ‘dupes’ in the past as a Marketing Promo… bring in the dupes, trade in for the real deal.
Questions remain: what makes THESE Costco articles the legal problem, where other dupes have not been. And how have these garments caused damage to Lululemon?

Doug Garnett
Noble Member
Reply to  Robin Mallory

Excellent points all around. In some ways brands and their owners have made their white label bed and just might suffer as a result. In some ways retailers are complicit in that they have rushed to fill their shelves with these goods. But, also, the devil is in the details for whether Lululemon has a solid legal argument as markets have always been filled with “close but not quite” goods. I certainly can’t predict the outcome.

Shep Hyken

Lululemon is a premium athleisure and athletic apparel brand. They are known for quality. If a retailer (Costco or any other brand) chooses to enter this market, the merchandise will surely be similar. Consider the differences between Lululemon, Viari, Athletica, and other similar brands/retailers. They all sell similar merchandise. To the average person, it’s the logos that let you know where the product is from.

If Lululemon has a trademark that’s copied or a patent on technology used in the material or any other unique aspect of their product, they would have a case against anyone who infringes on a trademark or patent. Otherwise, dupes or products that closely resemble another manufacturer are the norm in retail.

Brad Halverson
Brad Halverson

Sounds like subjectivity gone awry. Costco is doing what nearly most every retailer does with own-label products. Identify the brand leaders and innovators for a benchmark, assume similar materials, shapes, labels/packaging, add any tweaks, and market it at a great value. Case in point, Trader Joes, who are experts at this.

If you’re Lululemon, you need to assume your treasured designs and materials are already well in the hands of other factories and partner connections across Asia. Instead of suing Costco for something similar looking, have your products made in the USA, and invest your energy into staying ahead of the pack with new product lines.

James Tenser

Find me a consumer who actually mistook a Costco house brand apparel product for a high-end fashion item and I might take the Lululemon complaint more seriously.
Certainly is it appropriate for any brand to zealously defend its identity and market positioning, but I believe this instance is a “stretch.”

Mohamed Amer, PhD

Lululemon may have inadvertently shot themselves in the foot. By filing this lawsuit, they’ve essentially created massive free advertising campaign for Costco’s alternatives. Every consumer now knows they can get similar functionality for a whole lot less. Luxury brands typically succeed through mystique and perceived exclusivity. By dragging the comparison into public court, Lululemon is forcing consumers to confront the fundamental question: “What am I really paying for?” The angst isn’t about IP theft; it’s about market reality testing premium pricing.

From a business ethics standpoint, both companies are serving their stakeholders appropriately. Costco is delivering value to members who want quality athletic wear without premium pricing; and, Lululemon is protecting intellectual property that justifies their premium positioning. Dupes have been around forever, now social media has changed the game by making price comparisons immediate and more transparent.

Bottom line, these are two legitimate but competing approaches to value creation. Costco is playing hardball but staying within legal bounds. Lululemon’s real challenge isn’t legal—it’s proving their premium is justified by something more than artificial scarcity.

Robin Mallory
Robin Mallory

“Dupes” via social has become gamified. Vs years ago “knock off” was mainly a joke (aka K-mart special). Unless the rare find, where quality was high enough to pass for a used version of the real thing.
The argument would be hard to prove that Costco customers do not know the store & its product ranges… they unknowingly shopped in a value-oriented retailer?

Georganne Bender
Georganne Bender

“If you look across all of retail, 95% of all things are duplicates, 5% are innovation” Really? Of all the things we see in stores today only 5% of the designs are original? That’s pathetic. And if that’s true, where did Lululemon’s designs originate? Look, I get why Lululemon is upset, but unfortunately we live in a dupe-crazy world.

Jeff Sward

Market leaders have always been imitated or knocked-off. And they always will be. Now and forever. It immediately becomes a question of at what level of detail. And with no pictures or samples here it’s impossible to comment on the true merits of the case. But it’s hard to believe that Costco would put themselves in any jeapardy what so ever. They have zero incentive to go that far. At the same time, it’s hard to believe that Lulu would file a frivolous suit.
I would actually like to see a brand win this type of suit against a copycat or dupe product. It’s one thing to take inspiration and build a better mousetrap, but it’s another to flat out steal protected material. If anybody is really so lazy as to simply copy protected ideas, then they deserve to be busted and send a message to the market that you at least need to break a little bit of sweat to improve or modify the original. And any attempt to confuse or deceive the customer with packaging should also be dealt with harshly. In last week’s conversation about Aldi, the pictures said it all.

Gene Detroyer

Isn’t this what trademarks and logos are for? If it doesn’t have the Lulu trademark, the consumer knows it isn’t Lulu. If it is branded Kirkland, the customer knows it isn’t Lulu.

This is silly.

Neil Saunders
Famed Member
Reply to  Gene Detroyer

It also smacks a bit of desperation from Lululemon I know they have a history of being aggressive on protection, but this seems more of a stretch than their fabrics would even allow…

Gene Detroyer

https://www.wsj.com/business/retail/costco-kirkland-signature-pants-lululemon-792becb2?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAhkdpnHaA-a0XWjgnPAT-wFdA26usykgLcw9OPODUYrGRx2-b97tltj1Xo5mTg%3D&gaa_ts=6872cccb&gaa_sig=rHsWBEp5-oHcD-IYHvvDYGyM5DsymaySsQxa7NyAd3DiALlWW1iioTfuMIOkU6PfmgGmcJyGN9M_31-TzeNGjg%3D%3D

BrainTrust

"Costco isn’t doing anything different from what large department stores are already doing with their private label fitness clothing."
Avatar of Carlos Arámbula

Carlos Arámbula

Principal, Growth Genie Partners


"Lululemon has thrown a bomb into the middle of how modern retail operates. Everyone in retail should follow the case closely."
Avatar of Doug Garnett

Doug Garnett

President, Protonik


"Consider the differences between Lululemon, Viari, Athletica, and others. They all sell similar merchandise. To the average person, it’s the logos that truly differentiate."
Avatar of Shep Hyken

Shep Hyken

Chief Amazement Officer, Shepard Presentations, LLC


Recent Discussions

More Discussions