Ravenswood Leather kilt

[tundramanq]

The royal blue Ravenswood is in the mail (UPS) - eta Dec 24th.

[tundramanq]

Got it on time with a problem. It's about 6 inches too big in the waist (4 inches with the lacing fully closed and my Eggnog fluffed waist is at 34.5). The business ends of the apron snaps were reversed - cups were on under apron - so the top apron snaps were barely crimped on and one had already come loose when I got it. They say they are going to fix it. I suggested the sell it at a renfare and start anew. It looked pretty good. The only strange thing was the center back box pleat is to me wrong side out. Suspect the person that put it together, though doing great sewing job, had no idea how they should go. The red kilt earlier in this string has the back center box pleat correct.

UPDATE: I emailed them this string and they called me about sizing and the odd pleat in back. Apparently Utilikilt told them they have a patent on the pattern used on the rear of the red kilt in above post. Hmm!? Is far as I know Kingeese and reverse Kingeese pleat pattern has been around a lot longer than Utilikilt and is thus not patentable.

Opinions?

[Riverkilt]

Now that is just sad on multiple levels....

[RockyR]

UK DOES have a patent on the reverse kingussie pleating style in the US. Does that mean it's defensible if someone were to challenge it? Not necessarily, but that will cost money whether you win or lose, so is it worth it? I wouldn't challenge it, but would wait for someone else to, so when it's overturned, anyone could do it.

[tundramanq]

Am really bemused at Utilikilt if they did pull this threat on Ravenswood Leather. Utilikilt can hire better lawyers and bully the smaller companies? With an invalid design patent?

That isn't the image they try to portray.

[RockyR]

Am really bemused at Utilikilt if they did pull this threat on Ravenswood Leather. Utilikilt can hire better lawyers and bully the smaller companies? With an invalid design patent?

That isn't the image they try to portray.

They've held the patent since 2001 to dissuade companies from copying the "utility kilt" type design they invented. From a business standpoint, they were just trying to protect their idea and design.

As an FYI, they also included other parts of their kilt in that patent such as sewn edges on their pleats (making the pleats "permanent"). While it's not directly tied to their patent, it stops other companies from patenting certain things like sewn down pleat edges.

BTW, I know more than 1 contemporary kiltmaker has been asked "not to copy their pleating due to a patent infringement". It's not just Ravenswood.

[tundramanq]

I really don't think UK has much of a leg to stand on with the Kingiese or reverse Kinguise pleat pattern
A good discussion here: http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...pleated-34276/
Kind of get the idea the Kinguise and reverse patterns are at least 200 to 300 years old.
I understand UK has the resourses to keep small maker in court until they are broke.
They patented the Utilikilt as a whole utility kilt. It put a lot of old kilt and skirt features together.
There are some innovations in the design that are new, like the center angled front pockets and I respect the intellectual property rights on those things. Not so much the rest. There is a lot of grey area in infringment issues in all clothing. The only clear cut infringment issue would be the logos and it's association with a reputation for quality product.

UK needs to defend what they can as the quality of their product has slipped badly - I know, I have 30 Utilikilts, some dating to 2004, and have had to correct workmanship problems on 19 (correction 20) of them - mostly made since 2006. I think this is when they started contracting out the kilt making.

Although I love my Utilikilts, I am moving toward better made kilts for my money as these wear out.

[seanachie]

They've held the patent since 2001 to dissuade companies from copying the "utility kilt" type design they invented. From a business standpoint, they were just trying to protect their idea and design.

As an FYI, they also included other parts of their kilt in that patent such as sewn edges on their pleats (making the pleats "permanent"). While it's not directly tied to their patent, it stops other companies from patenting certain things like sewn down pleat edges.

BTW, I know more than 1 contemporary kiltmaker has been asked "not to copy their pleating due to a patent infringement". It's not just Ravenswood.

Wow! Interesting stuff. To my mind another gratuitous example of problems with the patent system. I bet there is plenty of "prior art" but you would have to spend a boatload of money to fight it. Well not that I like their product but surely one more company I would choose not to do business with.

[tundramanq]

I have had email discussions with Steve Villegas ( aka Krash ) over the past few years. He is the designer, founder and owner of Utilikilt. He IS highly concerned about the quality issue, but in a bind in several ways.

In trying to keep to the made in USA goal, he is hard pressed to find garment plants. Many have sold to overseas companies and the new owners shipped the equipment overseas where labor cost is more competative. The talent that ran the machines had to find other employment. He has been trying to remake the ( hard to work with nylon ) Spartan running kilt for about 3 years, but is totally unable to find anyone that can produce it in the quality and quantities he needs in the USA. The machinery and skill just isn't here anymore.

Second it is hard to get non kilt wearing people and factories to have enough pride of workmanship to do the spot on work or even understand what does matter. The garment is something they have never done before. Experienced kilt wearers do know what dosen't work even if they don't know why and will learn.

Outsiders think kilts are easy to make. The Utilikilt is not easy to make - guessing about 3 times the work of a traditional kilt. Less fabric but a lot more sewing thread and time is involved. Every waist size is a whole new set of precision cut pieces - every piece changes. Let one panel shift 1/4 inch in the sewing and the whole garment is trashed. They really can't be mass produced easily. In Utilikilt production, the fabric pieces are cut and given to one person who completes the garment. This gives some tracability when problem kilts are discovered. The Utilikilt wearhouse staff tries to inspect each kilt as it is received - in large quantities, from the factories. This is the current system Krash is using to get the best product he can.

[Riverkilt]

Back in the 60s I worked for a company that did cut and sew work. They had the original factory in the Northwest but built three additional factories in North Carolina. Factories were financed by Appalachian Redevelopment Money or something like that. Basically the government, through the Dept of Agriculture Rural Development backed the mortgage with the bank so the bank was covered if there was a default. Key to the project since most cut and sew plants don't have a lot of equity.

That program is still around. A local agency built a new two story outpatient building AND a new medical clinic that way. A non-profit agency has no equity either.

Its not hard to find folks to come to work. Many rural women know how to sew and sew well. Some brief training to move from home sewing machines to industrial power machines.

Out here where I live I've always thought it would be a great place for a cut and sew factory. The women on the Navajo reservation all sew well. The women in town all sew well. If there was a cut and sew plant it would be easy to staff. Jobs are scarce around here, and tourist seasonal. Year round jobs would be coveted.

Maybe some day, some way, Steve would consider opening his own sewing operation - cut out the middle man costs.

Doesn't have to be here - there are lots of pockets of high unemployment where there are skilled women to do the sewing.