The controversy deepened when Antik Batik claimed copyright in the disputed garment, creating the extraordinary situation in which a commercially produced fashion company asserted ownership over a design that the Mixe community said had been created and preserved collectively for more than 600 years. Reporting in The Guardian in June 2015 quoted Marant's office as acknowledging that the design originated in Tlahuitoltepec, apparently using that fact as a defense against Antik Batik's claim. Yet, according to the reporting cited in the source, the Mixe community had received no direct communication acknowledging its rights or contribution. In 2016, representatives again demanded an apology from both Marant and Antik Batik at a press conference in Mexico City. The episode became a pointed example of the gap between conventional Western copyright law and Indigenous systems of collective cultural ownership, while also intensifying scrutiny of luxury fashion's use of traditional craft without meaningful attribution.
Preparing the daily feature…
AI concept artworkArchive Record · 2010s
The Second Claimant: How Antik Batik Complicated the Oaxaca Blouse Dispute
Isabel Marant, Antik Batik, and the Mixe community of Santa María Tlahuitoltepec / 2010s
The controversy deepened when Antik Batik claimed copyright in the disputed garment, creating the extraordinary situation in which a commercially produced fashion company asserted ownership over a design that the Mixe community said had been created and preserved collectively for more than 600 years. Reporting in The Guardian in June 2015 quoted Marant's office as acknowledging that the design originated in Tlahuitoltepec, apparently using that fact as a defense against Antik Batik's claim. Yet, according to the reporting cited in the source, the Mixe community had received no direct communication acknowledging its rights or contribution. In 2016, representatives again demanded an apology from both Marant and Antik Batik at a press conference in Mexico City. The episode became a pointed example of the gap between conventional Western copyright law and Indigenous systems of collective cultural ownership, while also intensifying scrutiny of luxury fashion's use of traditional craft without meaningful attribution.
The daily editorial is currently unavailable. There’s still an entire archive to explore.
