In the other (closed) thread that McClef so graciously provided a link for, it was suggested that regulation (as that proposed by Howie Nicolsby) of what could or could not be called a Scottish kilt would cast a pall on non-Scottish kilt makers such as Matt Newsome, Barb Tewksbury, Kathy Lare, Lady Chrystel and many other fine craftsmen and women. That was a continued refrain there but since the thread was closed I couldn't respond.

I don't think it would matter a bit. If I understand correctly, wouldn't that sort of oversight or labeling restriction apply principally to those selling off the peg "tartan tat?" Where such rules are needed is wherever people (mainly tourists?) are buying good based on price rather than knowledge and who assume they're getting an authentic product. Someone who does the research and decides to buy a kilt made by Matt, Barb, Kathy or Chrystel is likely in a much better position to make a rational choice and are looking for quality of materials and workmanship rather than price or even origin. When you make that size an investment you're more likely to put some thought into it.

It's the poor guy or gal who says "Oooh..that 20 quid kilt would be a perfect souvenir of our trip to Edinburgh!" who needs protection.

Regards,

Brian