It's a catastrophe: NYC Officials Shred Seized Clothes, Refuse To Donate

NYC

In the wake of last week's reports that H&M mutilated unsold clothing before discarding it, the New York Times reports that the city of New York is participating in similarly wasteful practices.

Police destroyed bootleg clothing and shoes taken from raids on counterfeit operations after they were no longer needed as evidence. The goods were new, and included winter jackets, shirts, and pants. The shredding of usable, much-needed clothing cost the city $150 per ton.

In the past, the city has donated confiscated goods to aid groups, but the chief spokesman for the Police Department, Paul J. Browne, claimed there were no requests for clothing in 2009. The operators of a clothing bank disputed this.

Historically, organizations that received the donations avoided trademark infringement by defacing the knockoff labels. But the counterfeit status of the clothing still creates obstacles to its distribution. Major fashion brands are fighting expensive battles with counterfeiters--an agenda backed by Mayor Bloomberg--and they are reluctant to let bootleg goods back into circulation, even as charitable donations.

Robert Rucker, a lawyer with Tucker and Lafiti, a firm that represents Steve Madden and Zac Posen among others, offered his particularly smarmy and corporate-minded opinion on the companies:

“These are people who spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, some of them millions, to get counterfeit goods off the street. Everyone wants to feed and clothe the homeless. But how are you going to spend all this money and then put it back on the street?”

Interestingly, the fashion and licensing industries are financial supporters of the New York City Police Foundation, and in turn the NYC Police Foundation has backed trademark infringement investigations. According to the New York City Department of Homeless Services' Daily Census, as of January 8 there are 36,997 homeless New Yorkers. Donations of counterfeit goods could certainly be put to good use, but clearly the city has other priorities.