A war of words has erupted between two gift shops in the city’s inner west,after an established store publicly accused a newcomer of copying several elements of its business.
Hands,a popular store on Newtown’s Australia Street,has claimed a new store called Sharing,which opened about 500 metres away on King Street earlier this month,has copied key parts of its operations,ranging from interior design to products,to a green sign on the footpath out the front of the shop.
“We could not believe that someone would do this,and the more we learned,the more disbelief we felt,” read a long post on the Hands Instagram account,posted on Tuesday.
The store’s owner,John Luckman,went on to accuse Sharing of copying Hands’ brand colours,fit-out,furniture,website design and its stock in a missive to the shops’ 14,000 followers.
He said Hands had spent endless hours seeking “the most beautiful and interesting brands,makers and artists” for its store,only to see Sharing stock the same products.
“We’re not territorial,and we’re really happy if our makers and artists start selling in other stores but when someone goes through your website to rip off the entire list of brands you’ve built up,it is just devastating,” he said.
The post alleged that,despite some of Hands’ suppliers saying they would not work with Sharing,they had unwittingly sold their products to the company behind the new gift shop,which has a different name.
“Sharing,we didn’t agree to share anything with you,” the post,which was liked almost 4000 times,concluded.
Hands and Sharing are located about 500 metres apart. The stores are among several book and gift shops on and around King Street’s busy shopping strip.
An employee at Sharing said the criticism was unwarranted whenTheSun-Herald visited the store last week.
“They say we have copied them because we used the green but,if you look for yourselves,the name is different,” they said.
“Many gift shops go to the same designers for products.”
Answering questions via email,Sharing claimed it was not aware of Hands before opening its new store.
Sharing confirmed it conducted business under both a company name and a “branding name” but denied this caused any confusion for suppliers.
However,Sharing said it was open to changing aspects of its business after the backlash.
“If there is something that makes someone unhappy,as a new shop,we can make some change,” it said.
Sharing said it was insulted by accusations,and described the situation as “very sad”.
On Wednesday,Sharing posted a rebuttal to Hands’ post on its own Instagram page,which has 1000 followers.
“We haven’t even officially opened yet and we are already being bullied,” the post,which highlighted differing elements of the two stores’ design,read.
In response,Luckman toldThe Sun-Herald he rejected Sharing’s assertions,but he would not be pursuing the matter further.
He said he only sought to let his customers know that they were not the same business by making the widely shared Instagram post.
“As long as customers know that they aren’t us then that’s all that matters,” he said.
Andrew Terry,a University of Sydney professor of business regulation with expertise in business,intellectual property and competition law said small businesses had little legal protection in these matters.
“The only real way you can get proprietorship is through a registered trademark,” he said,noting that,in this instance,a trademark on the name of the shop would have been irrelevant.
“Any remedy would be in showing misleading or deceptive conduct,or the common law tort of passing off.
“This doesn’t seem to cross the line into that,” Terry said of the situation with the gift shops.