The argument that African designers are entitled to copy because Western brands have been copying Africa for decades is understandable emotionally but wrong legally and strategically.
We understand the frustration. Western brands have spent decades lifting kente, ankara, adire, and bogolan selling them at premium, attributing them to nobody, profiting from traditions they did not create. That is real. That harm is documented.
But the response to that cannot be reciprocal copying. Here is why.
Legally, two wrongs do not create a right. Copyright does not have a historical justice exception. The fact that a European fashion house once took from African culture does not give any designer anywhere a license to replicate another designer’s original work without permission or credit.
Strategically, it is self-defeating. African fashion has spent years building the argument that its creative output deserves legal protection, attribution, and commercial respect. The moment we use historical copying as justification for current copying, we hand that argument back to the brands that have been exploiting African creativity. You cannot claim the moral high ground on attribution and abandon it when it is inconvenient. The comparison does not hold factually. What Western brands did by lifting kente, ankara, adire prints, selling them at premium, attributing them to nobody, is exactly what African designers and advocates have been fighting against.
The solution to Western brands copying African fashion is stronger IP protection, geographical indications for our textile traditions, and enforceable attribution standards. Not reciprocal copying. You do not fix a broken system by breaking it further.