- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
dhb Blok Superstar jersey on Wiggle.co.ukStar-gate - Wiggle rejects Anna Glowinski "copying" claims after investigation
Wiggle has rejected allegations of plagiarism brought against it by Anna Glowinski, founder of women’s cycle clothing business Ana Nichoola, who had accused the online retailer on Friday of copying the star pattern used in a number of her designs for one of the products in the Blok range produced by its dhb in-house brand.
Over the weekend, Wiggle, which had come under criticism on social media as a result of Glowinski’s claims, promised that it would investigate the issue today and publish its findings, and did so this evening in a post on Facebook.
The online retailer, which said it has a “zero tolerance” approach to plagiarism, insisted that “no designer employed by us (directly or indirectly) has broken any of our policies or, more importantly, contravened our values.”
On Friday evening, designer, cyclist and TV presenter Glowinski had said she was “angry” and “heartbroken” after seeing dhb’s Superstar jersey, noting that Wiggle staff had met her at her office and studio around 18 months ago. She accused it of "copying" her design.
She said that she showed them some of her designs, and that they had later spoken about her collaborating with the company, but Wiggle decided not to proceed with that.
In a detailed statement which you can read in full below, maintained that the discussions with her involved its buying team which it says operates separately from the dhb design team, and that the latter “had no knowledge of any conversation with Anna Glowinski, nor any sight of her designs.”
Wiggle added: “We have shared this statement with Anna before publishing and have offered to meet up and take her though our design process and all of our inspiration material.
“We appreciate that the coincidence of the designs might have been puzzling for her, though there are so many designs in the marketplace today that it is unsurprising that these similarities coincidently appear from time to time.”
At the time of writing, Glowinski has not yet responded to Wiggle’s statement on either her Twitter feed or Facebook page.
Here is Wiggle’s statement in full:
Hi friends of Wiggle.
As promised, following our internal investigation here is our statement regarding Anna Glowinski.
At Wiggle we pride ourselves on our integrity, fairness and transparency. Therefore we have taken the claim made by Anna Glowinski (through Facebook on Friday 24th October 2014) that we have plagiarised one of her designs for our new dhb ‘Superstar’ Jersey very seriously.
After conducting a detailed and thorough internal investigation we have concluded that no plagiarism has occurred and that no designer employed by us (directly or indirectly) has broken any of our policies or, more importantly, contravened our values.
We categorically do not participate in or condone plagiarism under any circumstances. This is a zero tolerance policy for us. Our review gives us full confidence in our internal processes and the integrity of our staff in ensuring that this could not happen. We thank our colleagues for their openness and support in resolving this issue in a timely manner.
As this story is in the public domain, for our customers’ information and on behalf of our hard working colleagues that have been affected by this story, we layout our key findings below:
• On 17/1/2013, Anna Glowinski met with members of our Cycle Clothing Buying team at the London Bicycle Show at Excel.
• On 24/1/2013, Anna Glowinski sent a proposal to our Cycle Clothing Buying team regarding the possibility of her designing an exclusive collection for Wiggle.
• On 12/7/2013 our Cycle Clothing Buying team met with Anna to discuss this potential collaboration.
• On 7/8/2013, having reviewed Anna’s proposal, our Cycle Clothing Buying team emailed Anna, politely declining to range the product and sharing our feedback with her.
• On 21/7/2014, following her resignation from AnaNichoola, Anna Glowinski contacted our Cycle Clothing Buying team again, enquiring if there was the possibility of her working for Wiggle. We considered this kind offer carefully, but again decided to decline this proposal. No designs or products were discussed in these subsequent communications.
• It is important to highlight that our Cycle Clothing Buying team (based in Portsmouth) work independently from our dhb Design Team (based in London). There has never until this investigation been a conversation between these two teams at Wiggle regarding Anna Glowinski or AnaNichoola.
• Therefore it is unsurprising that in parallel (and unrelated to) the conversations and meetings between Anna and our Cycle Clothing Buying Team, our London based dhb Design team were independently working on our Autumn/Winter 2014 range, including our ‘Superstar’ Jersey. We register the intellectual property of all of our designs and to do this must save all of the ‘inspiration materials’ and initial ‘draft designs’. We can confirm with confidence by reviewing this audit trail, that the dhb Design team had no knowledge of any conversation with Anna Glowinski, nor any sight of her designs. Additionally, there had been no communication between our Portsmouth Cycle Clothing Buying Team and our London dhb Design Team relating to this new range.
• The inspiration for the Superstar Jersey (and indeed the other designs in our dhb Blok range, which it forms part of) involved many influences, including national flags and jockey jerseys – absolutely none of which could be traced from AnaNichoola or Anna Glowinski. To be clear the dhb Design team have never been in contact with Anna Glowinski or AnaNichoola Ltd at any stage.
We have shared this statement with Anna before publishing and have offered to meet up and take her though our design process and all of our inspiration material. We appreciate that the coincidence of the designs might have been puzzling for her, though there are so many designs in the marketplace today that it is unsurprising that these similarities coincidently appear from time to time. We wish Anna every success in her new endeavors.
We would also like to take this opportunity to reassure our loyal customers that we, as ever, stay true to the core ethics and principles that have led to our success to date and thank them for their continued support and custom.
Thanks for reading.
Wiggle.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- hawkinspeter 1 sec ago
You can add them to the original forum post, but you need to host the images elsewhere (e.g. Imgur) and then provide a direct image link between to...
- Simon E 4 min 2 sec ago
Physics doesn't work like that. 'Faster for the same effort' might be a better term. 1kg of extra weight will add roughly 2 seconds per 100 metres...
- Chris RideFar 28 min 37 sec ago
Conclusion: If you want to simplify tyre maintenance tasks, stick to hooked rims and inner tubes. I'm a pro' bike mechanic, and I wouldn't choose...
- Simon E 1 hour 40 min ago
Unless you know it's having an effect then it is as useful as Hirsute's little prayer. I'd put more faith in defensive riding, a shoulder check, an...
- Bungle_52 2 hours 17 min ago
A few observations...
- Bungle_52 2 hours 23 min ago
It's interesting that evading the police was considered dangerous driving but the driver that seriously injured Mr Pike in the link below was only...
- gekebiba 2 hours 56 min ago
Thank you, everyone, for your suggestions and support. ...
- spen 3 hours 31 min ago
I often wonder if these councillors and campaigners realise how little "infrastructure" could be provided for the money available. In civil...
- SamSeed 7 hours 32 sec ago
My 6KU, replaced everything but the front chainring over the past 5 years.
Add new comment
47 comments
Why is this article topic-tagged 'Women'?
If it had been a male designer would it be tagged male? I doubt it. That says a lot, in my opinion.
If it were a male designer who had founded a brand that exclusively produces women's clothing - as Ana Nichoola does - then, yes, it would still be tagged 'Women.'
Hope that answers your question.
I'm sure all of this would have gone away if Wiggle had just sent her a little bag of Haribo.
I really don't think that people understand the complexities behind this story. I have no affiliation regards either party but as a designer that has worked within the cycle industry in the past and understands how things operate I can only say that wiggles latest response is meaningless.
To the layman it appears wiggle have gone above and beyond in dealing with this situation, they have openly posted a timeline of events and eloquently worded a statement that seems transparent and truthful. The problem for me is not so much a plagiarism issue, I mean how many differing ways can you put stars on a jersey but rather that wiggle actually met and discussed designs with Glowinski. No one but wiggle and Glowinski know what designs were discussed and I'm sorry but the star design is just a little to similar to be anything other than an attempt to replicate something that was seen at this point. Wiggle have put a case forward that differing offices were involved in the design process, that may be the case but do you seriously believe either office wouldn't have knowledge of what the other was either involved with or currently in the process of designing? Don't be naive...
But Anna Glowinski's jacket design is a blatent rip off a Standard Fireworks Air Bomb from my childhood 50 years ago and the shape of the top replicates the Adidas track suit top of the seventies & eighties, is she going to pay royalties for ripping off their designs, no, I thought not. There are only so many designs that can be used in any clothing and sometimes there will be overlaps. Just bite the bullet, accept that mimicry is the best form of flattery & stop behaving like a "luvvie".
Was anybody (sane that is) seriously expecting Wiggle to say "oops - it's a fair cop - you caught us pilfering someone's work"? . Despite the warm and fuzzy wording of their first statement the response was always going to be deny, deny, deny - that's just how these things work. Then looks at the wording in the second statement: "Anna met", "Anna sent a proposal", "Anna contacted", etc. all worded to subtly plant the seed that Wiggle have tried to keep her at arms length the entire time and that Anna was desperate to work with Wiggle and was unhappy that nothing came of it - "a woman scorned" was how someone else, who fell for this crap, has commented above.
Anyways, I have no idea if this design was copied. All I can say for sure is that statement makes zero difference - it doesn't prove anything.
The statement does not need to prove anything. It is for the person making the allegation to prove.
You must, I assume, equally believe that the original claim lacks proof and makes zero difference?
But lets face it, it does a damn fine job in limiting the damage Anna was trying to inflict... so job done. As I mentioned, they can afford some good PR... and you are right, they did a subtle number on her.
I think the TRP story linked to previously shows blatant copying, this is not blatant copying.
I don't wish to comment on the legal aspects of this, but it's clear to see who has won the PR battle.
The way I see it, Glowinski made a claim, Wiggle have then gone away, rapidly investigated and given a comprehensive response to which there has been no counter claim. Nothing to see, time to move on in my opinion.
I doubt it will get to court, unless she is given a cast iron guarantee of a win. Most barristers will give 50 - 50 chance and only sway a few percent even if they think they can win.
If she pursues this to the courts it cost hundreds of thousands if not into million pound for costs she still could be liable for her costs if she has only a partial win.
I doubt it will get to court, unless she is given a cast iron guarantee of a win. Most barristers will give 50 - 50 chance and only sway a few percent even if they think they can win.
If she pursues this to the courts it cost hundreds of thousands if not into million pound for costs she still could be liable for her costs if she has only a partial win.
I think Anna will struggle to follow a legal course with this.
Even if... and that's if, the buying team had, having seen the designs, phoned up the DHB design team and said 'stars, I want loads of stars' that is not copying in a legal sense.
I think Wiggle have handled this very well, which is not surprising when you consider the buying power they have... not only can they get the best deals on product, but they can hire the best PR folk too.
I am not a Wiggle fan and will avoid using them when I can (I think they will get an order out of me a year on average), but I am struggling to side with Anna on this one.
There are plenty of more shocking stories out there surrounding Wiggles behaviour to the trade that don't see the light of day... I can't help but think thats because a) Anna had the balls to do it, but b) it certainly didn't do any harm that she has a fairly high profile and an attractive face.
Good response from Wiggle. Well done.
It says a great deal to me that Anna chose a Friday night to publish her 'concerns' on social media ... knowing full well that Wiggle would have had very little opportunity of investigating the case and providing any sort of response for at least 3 days.
Maximum publicity to her cause and maximum damage to Wiggle's PR ... because they turned her down for a job she wanted. Twice. A woman scorned.
I was kind of with you until you insisted on the use of the phrase "a woman scorned" which has distinctly sexist overtones to it.
I would wonder if she knew the person she'd contacted was on maternity leave. That added to the delay in Wiggle being able to investigate and respond.
That's been the general gist from a lot of posters on here, thinly veiled misogyny.
It's pretty disappointing really.
I've find it surprising that theyve been so restrained and have tried at least to disguise it. Usually its just in the face no holds barred.
Isn't it just......
Its not the first time a similar thing has happened either (although this case is a lot more clear cut)
Coporate company issues release that marks out some dates, says that the left hand doesnt know what the right hand does, and thats that. The baying pack then unleash at the individual (who for her misfortune happens to be female), all the while having little to no information except what are possibly the conflicting
designs, with most having no concept of design, or its processes.
Bunch of bitchy hairdressers gossiping over shit they know nothing about.
Wow, not heard about that before. What happened, did he just taeke it on the chin due to lack of funds to sue, or did he have them for it?
I emailed them and asked if they were still selling their model (would have bought it over the TRP) but they replied they had pulled out of the market because of what had happened.(Im paraphrasing. It was interspersed with much more colloquial terms!)
Shame because it is some beautiful boutique engineering. Ended up getting some Ciamillo Micro GSM's.
...hmmm, lost me at that last sentence...
is there not a bit of hypocrisy there?
...plus, once again, the whole point of internet forums is for sharing uneducated opinions... without that what is there? A bunch of news stories, with comments such as;
"hmm, I have some strong feelings about this, but without knowledge of the full story I don't feel qualified to comment"
"hmm, I have no educated opinion to provide at this time"
"nothing good to say, so I'll say nothing"
etc. etc.
Personally speaking, social media is a powerful weapon to use, but the problem with it is that it doesn't always necessarily go your way. Anna chose to use social media as her weapon of choice, so surely has to accept that others will see things a different way.
This would not be a story at all had this been about a designer called Adam, and if it happened to make it as a story, the nay sayers would, I'm sure, be far more ferocious in their comments.
I wasnt aiming at 'getting', or 'keeping' you.
Look back through several of the threads about it on here and its idiots making ludicrous judgement calls about designs they havent seen, when they have no prior knowledge or training about design, or intellectual property rights/laws.
How is that anything but a bunch of hairdressers?
Add in the nasty sexism that raises its head too often and that more than justifies the 'bitchy' part.
Suggesting the internet would be a tepid place if people didnt act like that?
Really? You really think that? No point continuing with this then...
We've actually seen the supposedly similar designs and you have no information about the people responding. They may have 'prior knowledge or training about design, or intellectual property rights/laws.' You just don't know, but you display your bias by assuming they don't.
Which is a personal attack, seemingly with an anti-gay overtone. Pretty nasty.
At most we're talking about disparaging remarks aimed at Anna that are gendered. That may not be sexism, since it's perfectly possible and quite likely that a male designer would get disparaging remarks aimed at him too, just gendered differently.
Sophistry in motion.
If you call a man a douche and a woman a bitch for the same offense, how does that demonstrate that you think less of a woman than of a man?
I wasnt aiming at 'getting', or 'keeping' you.
Look back through several of the threads about it on here and its idiots making ludicrous judgement calls about designs they havent seen, when they have no prior knowledge or training about design, or intellectual property rights/laws.
How is that anything but a bunch of hairdressers?
Add in the nasty sexism that raises its head too often and that more than justifies the 'bitchy' part.
Suggesting the internet would be a tepid place if people didnt act like that?
Really? You really think that? No point continuing with this then...
It's a very similar statement to the one LOCOG produced over the multi armed petal torch that was totally ripped. Not that I'm saying these jerseys are ripped. I know nothing of that.
Probably will still be played out in the courts
I love how people are leaping to one "side" or the other. She's made a not unreasonable claim (that certainly isn't likely to be seen by Wiggle as libel), they've taken it seriously and given a reasoned and detailed rebuttal.
People who have no strong opinion either way on something are far less likely to comment on it. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who reserve their judgment.
Pages