What would you do?

[Andrews Son]

I believe this site is spot on as it is. we have respected advertisers here with members who respect them eg great companionship, great ethics and great quality. And the internet is a circus anyway and IMHO should be away from xmarks. But the point is being put across by each member that we want people who put pride in their work, not shady businesses with even shadier practices. I look forward to hearing more comments (please dont let my opinions subjagate yours, if thats the word for it) but sounds like a one-sided fight so far

Gavin

[Liam]

Much obliged Steve, did not realise it was so easy to get over there. Cheers

If I understand Steven Villegas' patent correctly, he as patented what might be referred to as the "reverse Kingussie" in the US. Has he patented it in other countries? A patent is a monopoly only in the jurisdiction where it exists. If Steven Villegas' wishes to have the same monopoly rights in other jurisdiction then he needs to obtain a patent there. I don't view this as a matter that in any way involves ethics or morals if someone makes or sells a patented item outside the jurisdiction of the patent. Here is a link to an article about patents.
http://patent-advice.ca/information/...Fa10Qgod50UAEg

Now, Steve, back to your original post. I do put a higher level of trust in the advertisers here, just as I do the membership here, but look to you as the forum "owner" to establish the rules for both advertisers and members as you see fit.

[okiwen]

Admittedly, I read two pages and saw a trend I agreed with and considered I had nothing of value to add. Crazy talk! I ALWAYS add value.

I own and wear Utilikilt. I own, wear, and make traditional. I look to these particular vendors BECAUSE of this site. I don't buy much because money is dear at times, but when I do, this is the first stop.

I don't keep many friends because I have a higher standard for the word then that of acquaintance. I consider some people I've met through Xmarksthescot to be friends. I would expect nothing less than ethical.

[techdragon]

I think that I should also weigh in here, albeit briefly because these issues are a bit to dear to my heart. This is more a voice of myself as an advertiser (Alt.Kilt) and a designer since I do not wear kilts. Business, as of late, has been really hard all around. I do a bulk of my advertising on FB because of a large following there and honestly, dealing with people day in and day out who point out that they can by something "close enough" for 1/2 of your price, gets old quickly. Business is business but I feel as though a strong ethical code should also go with.

If an advertiser here were using photos from someone else, and it could be proven that no permission was granted, would you feel confidant dealing with that company?
Would you want a company who uses photos without permission to be able to advertise here? No and No. I fight this battle all the time and it is hard to participate, let alone win. I also have had to hire my own photographers (at first) and then spend hours later learning to take good photos on my own in order to save the expense. If you are a solid business and this is your passion - you should WANT your own photos.

Would you feel confidant buying a Utilikilt knock-off from a company operating in a country not covered by that patent?
Would you buy products from such a company and would you want such companies to be able to advertise here? No. I understand that the patent is not recognized in many other countries - though I also do see a lot of people ripping it off here in the USA. The hard part with clothing is that it is almost impossible to copyright the design (UK has a variety of aspects in their patent and the only way that they were able to get the pleat layout in there was because it 'significantly changed the functionality of the garment'). I can't patent my box pleats - and honestly, I don't really care if someone out there is making box peat kilts that are similar because there is nothing I can do about it. I have tricks that I use for fitting and personalizing that I hope puts me apart from others. I did a lot of research to make sure that I was not ripping other people off when I started Alt.Kilt in 2006.


Would the membership here hold those who advertise here to a higher ethical standard? I would, as an advertiser and kilt maker, hope the community here does so.

Would you want a company who makes or resells in one country, products that are under copyright or patent in another country, to be able to advertise on X Marks? No.

Would you buy those products if the price were lower than from the copyright holder? I, personally, do not buy kilts but I constantly get asked for recommendations and am pleased to recommend quality over price concerns. I do rely on the advertisers here as a base to start people off on the right foot.

To you, the members of X Marks, is price the overriding factor or do you hold yourselves, and by default this forum, to an ethical, over legal, standard? I think that ethics should trump price but I also think that quality trumps price.

I hope that helps in the discussion. I am proud to be a member here and I love sharing this resource with other kilt lovers.

[pbutts]

ditto ditto ditto ditto ...... ;-)

I saw the OP last night and I'm just catching up now. Like many I agree whole-heartedly with the general consensus for taking the high road and appreciate the collective wisdom. So here's my two cents' worth--

1) This is a fundamental issue that deserves everyone's input; and

2) When it comes to sponsorship, I would support be da veva's proposal for a Paypal Donation option if the current vendor sponsorship system ever becomes problematic. I spend a fair amount of time on another large BB that has operated that way for over ten years.

[ratspike]

The question of patents and knock-offs kinda left the door wide open to interpretation. Does that mean anyone who makes a reverse Kingussie pleated kilt with pockets and a narrow-ish apron? While IANAL, looking at the patent, I guess it can be fairly said that I make sometimes make Utilikilt knock-offs. Obviously that's not how I feel about it but if the Utilikilt legal department decided to get frisky with me there wouldn't be much I could do about it. Maybe I'll just stick to knife pleats...

Are the questions of patents and knock-offs only referring to the stuff coming from overseas? I think a more clear definition of what's considered okay and what's considered a cheap copy would definitely be in order if there was going to be a line drawn for advertisers.

Would you feel confidant buying a Utilikilt knock-off from a company operating in a country not covered by that patent? Would you buy products from such a company and would you want such companies to be able to advertise here?
If I were going to buy a kilt I definitely would not buy a knocked-off import. They're obvious copies, and that bugs me. On the various forums where I hang out I really prefer to not see ads for vendors who sell blatant copies of someone else's stuff.

Would the membership here hold those who advertise here to a higher ethical standard?
I think that's already the case here. The bar is set pretty high and I don't think it would be allowed to slip.

Would you want a company who makes or resells in one country, products that are under copyright or patent in another country, to be able to advertise on X Marks?
It depends. I don't have any issue with someone who makes a fantastic kilt and gives their customers a great experience, even if it shares some visual characteristics with a Utilikilt. IMO there's only so many ways to make one of these things, and to the average person one cargo/utility style kilt looks a lot like all the others. A flat out copy, like the stuff that Etsy is flooded with, is completely different.

Would you buy those products if the price were lower than from the copyright holder?
No.

To you, the members of X Marks, is price the overriding factor or do you hold yourselves, and by default this forum, to an ethical, over legal, standard?
Price is always something that I consider when I'm buying something, but I won't support a business whose moral and ethical compass points south just because they're cheaper.

[Tobus]

I started to read all the responses here, but I don't have time to go through it all, and it wouldn't change what I'm about to say anyway.

In short, I think ethics are perhaps the single most important thing that makes or breaks a company/business, a website/forum like this one, or a community. There are many things that can cause the downfall of an otherwise successful entity, but an unethical practice is a guarantee of failure. And it's because ethics = character.

Let's not confuse patent laws with ethics. There are many things which are legal but unethical. And, for that matter, there are many things which are illegal but perfectly ethical. We would all like to think that laws and ethics go hand-in-hand, but that is not always the case. So IMHO the topic of patent laws here is irrelevant. Even if a company is operating within the boundaries of the law where they live, if they are operating unethically, they do not deserve the respect or business of anyone who cherishes ethics (as I would hope all of our members do). We are not a government entity, and are free to choose our own standards independently of the law.

With that said, I think all of the questions posed come down to this single issue: if we allow unethical practices, or reward them, then we don't really have any ethics of our own.

So my answer is pretty straightforward. No, we should not allow businesses to advertise here who are engaged in unethical practices of any sort. And yes, we should expect businesses who do advertise here to be unquestioningly ethical, moral, honest, and of the highest calibre. I know of at least one former XMTS advertiser who was shown the door due to unethical/questionable practices, and we are better off for it.

If we don't hold ourselves, our members, and our advertisers to an ethical standard, then we have nothing of value.

[Grizzly]

I started to read all the responses here, but I don't have time to go through it all, and it wouldn't change what I'm about to say anyway.

In short, I think ethics are perhaps the single most important thing that makes or breaks a company/business, a website/forum like this one, or a community. There are many things that can cause the downfall of an otherwise successful entity, but an unethical practice is a guarantee of failure. And it's because ethics = character.

Let's not confuse patent laws with ethics. There are many things which are legal but unethical. And, for that matter, there are many things which are illegal but perfectly ethical. We would all like to think that laws and ethics go hand-in-hand, but that is not always the case. So IMHO the topic of patent laws here is irrelevant. Even if a company is operating within the boundaries of the law where they live, if they are operating unethically, they do not deserve the respect or business of anyone who cherishes ethics (as I would hope all of our members do). We are not a government entity, and are free to choose our own standards independently of the law.

With that said, I think all of the questions posed come down to this single issue: if we allow unethical practices, or reward them, then we don't really have any ethics of our own.

So my answer is pretty straightforward. No, we should not allow businesses to advertise here who are engaged in unethical practices of any sort. And yes, we should expect businesses who do advertise here to be unquestioningly ethical, moral, honest, and of the highest calibre. I know of at least one former XMTS advertiser who was shown the door due to unethical/questionable practices, and we are better off for it.

If we don't hold ourselves, our members, and our advertisers to an ethical standard, then we have nothing of value.

I couldn't agree more or put it better myself. I completely agree with what others, Regina and Tobus have said.

[KD Burke]

Others have expressed, more eloquently and at greater length, my views upon this subject. I merely wish to interject an interesting and illuminating factoid.

If one visits the website of the Better Business Bureau ( a private, consumer protection organization for those outside North America) and enters the word "kilt" into their search engine, a surprising number of businesses are listed.

Notably, a company called Freedom Kilts in Victoria, BC has an A+ rating (their highest) from the BBB.

[Liam]

All... While I too absolutely support ethical behavior, ethics (unlike law) can be shades of grey. Since Utilikilts have been discussed here, lets explore ethical behavior in the context of their product. They have a US (and perhaps a UK) patent on the reverse Kingussie pleating style. It is therefore an infringement of their patent rights for another company in the US (and UK) to use this form of pleating when making/selling a kilt in the US/UK. Now presuming that they were also the first company to do something novel such as make a utility style kilt out of canvas (not part of their patent) would it be unethical for another kilt maker to make a kilt from canvas? Similarly with box pleat kilts - Barb, Matt and Bob revived the box pleat tartan kilt. Does this mean that it would be unethical for John at Keltoi, or Rocky at USA Kilts to make a box pleat kilt?
Sometimes imitation is the best form of flattery.

Just something more to chew on.

Cheers