As the designer behind OX, my vision was to create jewelry that moved and would move the wearer. My inspiration is layered; I was inspired by skate culture as much as I was by time itself. I think of OX as a concept brand, one where the hourglass form is both the genesis of all designs and the guardrail delineating what we are not.
It’s sticky, the question of what counts as “inspired by” versus what constitutes a copy. A legal expert, for example, will have a different perspective than a jewelry expert or even a consumer.
How does it feel, though, as a creative, to be copied? I don’t know of any creatives who feel good about it. But it is well-acknowledged and accepted as something that comes with the territory, so for better or for worse, I do myself the service of not paying attention to trends, social media, and other distractions that often cocoon the hotbed of the copycat community. Most importantly, I have learned that despite the dupe, the copy, the impersonation, they will never be me, and me is what lives in my pieces.
The issue with copycats is that most believe success rests on a formula that can be cut and pasted. The truth is, the formula is the creatives themselves and their processes, which are often the “soul” reason — pun intended — that the brand dies with the creative. The resonance changes, and therefore so do the process, the collection, and ultimately the collector.
Main image: OX’s patented diamond Ourglass designs in 18-karat gold, which have been a target of copycats. (OX NY)
