The real boogeyman in this legislation, i.e. the intended target as described in the article, seems to be China making cheap replicas. I think cheap replicas ar

The real boogeyman in this legislation, i.e. the intended target as described in the article, seems to be China making cheap replicas. I think cheap replicas are probably a good thing. Why wouldn't I want the same thing but cheaper? It's not my job to ensure that local designers stay in business. Especially not if their design patents (which is what I'm asking about) can be reproduced accidentally. For example, since clothing is much too necessary, universal, and functional, there are no patents or copyrights on clothing design. I think that's a good thing. The only thing you can do with clothing is trademarks, so as long as a similar-looking garment doesn't say it was made by some other designer, I don't see a problem with copying clothes. Why does furniture have design patents? Design patents cover similar designs as the original, and there's no need to demonstrate that they were copied. How does punishing "independent invention" (legal term for utility patents) help us with design patents?