• @davidgro
    link
    511 year ago

    The issue is that some of the brands are intentionally destroying unsold clothing so ‘the poors’ can’t end up wearing their brand and I guess diluting the brand’s reputation or something.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          There are always a few people willing to pay a crazy price for some crazy nonsense garbage. I think it’s ok to make few shirts like that, but you have to make sure you actually sell all of them. Better not manufacture more than you can sell.

      • @davidgro
        link
        51 year ago

        Yeah, they might after this

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -11 year ago

      They could just punch an eye hole in it somewhere and send it to some place that wants/needs clothes.

      • @davidgro
        link
        9
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m not sure what you mean. They are (currently) explicitly making sure that the clothing never ends anywhere that wants/needs clothes - as in the goal is anti-charity.

        Under the new law, I hope they can’t take a hole puncher to it. If they are allowed, they’ll do as much damage as they legally can.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Because you aren’t likely to run into someone with a “fake” and they couldn’t just ship them back to western countries to resell and undercut. How is that worse then them currently destroying them?

          • @davidgro
            link
            21 year ago

            Oh, interesting. I wasn’t aware of the reselling thing, and from the votes it seems a lot of others weren’t either. I guess if it’s just punched on something like the label/tag then that would be fine. Or maybe use permanent dye/bleach to blot it out.