It has often been a discussion in the fashion industry on how to protect your designs. While designers aren’t allowed to trademark an entire garment, they are allowed to trademark certain aspects such as pocket design or logos.

A recent court case involving Yves Saint Laurent and Christian Louboutin brings up another potential trademark: color. I, like many girls, regularly drool over my dream pair of Louboutin shoes with their towering heels and bright red sole. Also like many other girls, my main identifier for these shoes is the red sole. In YSL’s 2011 cruise line, four styles of shoes featured an all-red coloring, including the soles. Louboutin proceeded to file a preliminary injunction against the sale of the shoes as well as for damages. YSL proceeded to sell the shoes regardless, and the case moved on.

Many designers have lobbied for the right to patent or trademark their designs. However, even without legal action, the industry oftentimes performs a sort of check on itself to discourage copies. With the help of thousands of careful observers in blogs, magazines, etc., it doesn’t take long to notice when one designer puts out the same thing as another. The damage this can do to a designer’s reputation is usually not worth the risk.

Part of the argument not to allow designers to patent designs is that the fashion industry thrives off of putting clothes through a cycle. Lower end stores create their own, more affordable versions of designer brands for the general public to buy. This cycle is what brings trends in and out.

So, should a color be trademarked? YSL has featured shoes with a red sole since the 1970s. Louboutin showed his first in 1992, filed for a trademark and had it rejected in 2002, then had the file accepted in 2008. However, YSL argues that despite the fact that Louboutin was granted trademark, “no one designer should be able to monopolize a primary color for an article of clothing.”

It seems reasonable. Would it make sense to allow only one company to make white T-shirts if they were to trademark the color white? Of course not. However, other companies like Tiffany have a copyright on their signature blue box and Hermes has copyright over their shade of orange. The slippery slope argument is rarely a strong one in law, but in the fashion industry, trends are created on slippery slopes.

Louboutin needs to drop the case. If the red sole is as recognizable as they claim, YSL creating a line with four all red shoes shouldn’t be too much of an issue. The second that YSL puts out a pair of black pumps with a red sole, the fashion world will go berserk with accusations of copying. I seriously doubt that a well known fashion house such as YSL would even consider making such a terrible move.

The fashion industry is already an elitist one. Can’t spend $500 (or about $900 in the case of a basic Louboutin pump) on a pair of shoes? Don’t even bother stepping into the ranks of the well styled. But we poor college students and average fashionistas get by. We put in the time bargain hunting and look for the quality that we can afford in the hopes we’ll find that perfect piece that is on trend and in our price range. With the addition of patenting designs and trademarking colors, we’d be lucky to be able to buy a pair of blue jeans without some company making a monopoly.

Instead we force designers to come up with new and innovative designs. We demand the effort put into an ever changing fashion world. If a designer is good enough to do something as well and as simply as a red soled high heel, more power to designers. But, the designers should have to do it with the understanding that the law isn’t all protecting. Building a good brand will be.