When Fashion Meets the Law: How 'Siti Khadijah' Defended Her Telekung Design

By: Nur Farisha Adriana

Case: Siti Khadijah Apparels vs Ariani Textiles

When we hear about intellectual property (IP), we may picture pirated DVDs or fake brand logos on merchandise. But what if the issue involves something more culturally meaningful to our Malaysian community, like the telekung, a traditional prayer garment worn by Muslim women?

This was the core of a major legal battle involving Siti Khadijah Apparel Sdn. Bhd., a prominent local brand celebrated for its stylish, comfortable, and thoughtfully designed telekung.

Siti Khadijah wasn’t offering just any ordinary 'telekung'. Their designs featured thoughtful and unique innovation such as adjustable face openings, refined stitching, and intricate details combining both practicality with elegance and modesty. These unique touches quickly made their products popular throughout Malaysia and Southeast Asia.

However, as expected it wasn’t long before similar versions began appearing in the market, most notably from Ariani Textiles, another prominent name in local fashion. The resemblance was striking, from the overall shape to the lace accents and facial design. At last, Siti Khadijah accused Ariani of replicating key aspects of their original creation.

Many people think that fashion can’t be copyrighted. But that’s only partially true.

In this case, Siti Khadijah sued Ariani under copyright law, claiming that their design drawings and final telekung products were artistic works protected under the Malaysian Copyright Act 1987.

Ariani, on the other hand, argued that clothing/ telekung, being a functional product falls outside the scope of copyright. They suggested it was fair game unless it was protected under industrial design law, not copyright.

Court Ruling:

The High Court of Malaysia sided with Siti Khadijah, rejecting Ariani’s arguments.

The court recognized the design sketches provided to manufacturers as “graphic works,” which fall under the protection of copyright law. It also determined that the telekung itself, despite being a functional item. It is qualified as an “artistic work” because of its distinctive design, decorative elements, and creative structure. Most importantly, the court emphasized that wearable products can still represent creative expression through their original design process, and that originality is worth protecting under the law.

Therefore, as a designer, whether you're sewing garments, crafting furniture, or designing digital assets, remember: your ideas have value and the law can have your back.