Innovation Over Protection - Competitive Advantage in the French Fashion Industry

The French fashion industry—spanning from 19th-century haute couture to contemporary practices—has thrived on relentless innovation despite only modest formal intellectual property (IP) protection for fashion design. This article explores how legal frameworks historically afforded limited protection to fashion creations, and why fashion has nonetheless sustained competitive advantage through innovation. We begin by examining the historical establishment of intellectual property law and its incomplete coverage of fashion design, highlighting the piracy paradox whereby copying fails to stifle (and may even spur) creativity. We then discuss the development of innovation theory, including the Oslo Manual’s typology of product, process, marketing, and organizational innovation, and relate these concepts (as well as architectural, disruptive, incremental, and radical innovation) to the fashion sector. Next, we trace the legal and institutional evolution of France’s fashion industry—from Charles Frederick Worth and the 1868 founding of the Chambre Syndicale de la Couture Parisienne, through the 20th-century efforts to combat design piracy, to the modern Fédération de la Haute Couture et de la Mode. Using strategic management lenses (Porter’s competitive advantage theories, Barney’s resource-based view, Teece’s dynamic capabilities and appropriability framework), we analyze how French fashion houses leverage innovation in lieu of strong IP: through continuous creative renewal, process and business-model breakthroughs, branding, and reputational capital (Porter, 1990; Porter, 1998; Barney, 1991). Detailed case studies of key innovators (Worth’s haute couture establishment, Zara’s fast fashion revolution, and Iris van Herpen’s tech-driven couture) illustrate how different forms of innovation have conferred sustained competitive advantages while legal protections remained limited. We find that French fashion’s dominance has been maintained by turning creativity, speed, and brand prestige into effective substitutes for formal IP rights. In closing, we emphasize how legal gaps in design protection have been filled by strategic innovation, clever organizational practices, and the cultivation of intangible assets, thereby offering insights for creative industries at large.