.png)
In recent years minimalism has taken the internet by storm, a trend that a unique few have quickly seized control of and managed to capitalise on.
But what happens when 2 influencers with strikingly similar aesthetics clash over creative ownership? This is the issue that Sydney Gifford has brought forward against Alyssa Sheil in a case that has been dubbed the ‘beige lawsuit’.
Sydney Gifford is suing Alyssa Sheil for copying her aesthetic, resulting in alleged lost income and ‘mental anguish’.
If you were to click on either Gifford or Sheil’s Instagram pages, you would be immediately assaulted with a sea of posts featuring beige decor, all of which is conveniently linked back to Amazon.
Both Women hold contracts with amazon as members of the amazon influencer program. This contract allows both women to earn commission from products purchased through their ‘amazon storefront’.
Gifford stated that she was contacted by a follower, who brought Alyssa Sheil’s content to her attention - stating that her ‘vibe’ felt distinctly alike to Gifford’s. Upon inspection, both influencers amazon storefront’s feature many of the same products, which is how Gifford initially confirmed that Sheil had ultimately ‘stolen’ her vibe. This left a bitter taste for Gifford, who filed the lawsuit a few months later.
This lawsuit raises interesting questions; is a ‘vibe’ something that can be stolen? Is a ‘vibe’ something that any one person can own in the first place?
We asked Gen-Z whether they believe that a vibe is deserving of copyright protection, 81% agreed that it was not.
Copyright law is intended to protect tangible works whereas the argument brought forward by Gifford’s team is that a ‘vibe’ is an inherently subjective term and could easily mean different things to different people. The 81% disagreement with the basis of the lawsuit suggests that Gen-Z reject the idea of ownership over an aesthetic, one which has been recreated by countless influencers during its rise in popularity.
Sydney Gifford, who filed the Lawsuit on the 22nd of April 2024, alleges that following a meeting between herself and Sheil in winter of 2022, Sheil’s social media posts began to look extremely like her own. In response, Gifford has brought forward 8 claims ranging from copyright infringement and Violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to Tortious interference, essentially alleging that Sheil interfered with Gifford’s contract with amazon, this particular claim was dismissed.
But If you thought that the issues around these women’s strikingly similar beige homes would make for a beige lawsuit, you’d be mistaken. This Landmark case filed in Austin, Texas, is one of the first intellectual property disputes between influencers and could change the way that the influencer industry runs and how creative content is protected.
This is especially true as there are currently very few protections in the influencer industry - which is why it is inevitable that this issue was brought to court in the first place. In an interview with the verge, Gifford stated “It felt like somebody took a piece of my business and is profiting off of it as their own”.
There is a lot of resistance towards the idea of legally protecting an influencer’s vibe or aesthetic, no matter how closely they relate this concept to their business, as is exemplified by the 81% of Gen-Z who disagree with the grounds of the lawsuit.
Alyssa Sheil’s lawyers offered a comment regarding this:
"We absolutely agree [with the poll results] - that’s why we are fighting this so hard on Alyssa’s behalf. A vibe or an aesthetic isn’t entitled to any protection under the law because it is too generic. That’s what we believe Gifford’s claims boil down to, and we look forward to proving it".
We reached out to Sydney Gifford’s representation for comment and are awaiting her response.
Even though 81% disagree, there is a lot of nuance to this case and regardless of what Gen-Z thinks, the matter will soon be settled in Texas courts.
.png)