D contracted one of its suppliers, Judy-Philippine, Inc., to manufacture a line of children's outfits. D simply sent photographs of a number of garments from P's line, on which Judy-Philippine's garments were to be based. P's line was copied with minor modifications. Sixteen of P's garments, many of which contained copyrighted elements were blatantly copied. D sold the so-called knockoffs, generating more than $ 1.15 million in gross profits. JCPenney complained to P about P products being sold at D at a lower price. P did not supply its clothing to D. D and several other major retailers -- Kmart, Caldor, Hills, and Goody's -- were selling the knockoffs of P's outfits produced by Judy-Philippine. P sued D, Judy-Philippine, Kmart, Caldor, Hills, and Goody's for copyright infringement under federal law, consumer fraud and unfair competition under New York law, and -- most relevant for our purposes -- infringement of unregistered trade dress under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). Everybody settled but D. The jury found in favor of P. on all of its claims. D then renewed a motion for judgment as a matter of law, claiming that there was insufficient evidence to support a conclusion that Samara's clothing designs could be legally protected as distinctive trade dress for purposes of §43(a). The court denied the motion and awarded P damages. D appealed and the Appeals Court affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.