Hands Aff Oor Kilts!

[cessna152towser]

I have reservations about this idea. I can see where they are coming from in wishing to safeguard the traditional Scottish kilt making industry but:-
1. Cheap foreign kilts worn by those who cannot yet afford a traditional 8-yard wool kilt help to popularise the kilt as a garment and can help grow the traditional kilt business in the longer term.
2. Are the splendid hand made kilts I have imported from USA Kilts and Freedom Kilts somehow thought to be inferior because they were made in USA and Canada? I do not think that can be the intention - even the salesman in Houston Kiltmakers was favourably impressed when I went into their shop in Paisley wearing a Freedom Kilt.

[Jock Scot]

I think I am right to say that,only whisky produced in Scotland can be called "Scotch whisky".So what is the problem with" Scottish kilts"?Only a thought.

[Nick]

I think I am right to say that,only whisky produced in Scotland can be called "Scotch whisky".So what is the problem with" Scottish kilts"?Only a thought.

Also, that's not just a copyright, that was an act of Parliament.

[robthehiker]

I think I am right to say that,only whisky produced in Scotland can be called "Scotch whisky".So what is the problem with" Scottish kilts"?Only a thought.

There was an interesting trademark fight in Canada a couple of years back. From http://www.trademarkblog.ca/scotch-d...nadian-whisky/ :

"The Scotch Whisky Association is battling a Cape Breton distiller of whisky over its use of the word Glen in its trademark. The Association, which represents the owners of well known brands such as Glenfiddich, Glenlivet and Glenmorangie, is concerned that consumers will assume that Glen Breton Rare single malt whisky, produced by Glenora Distillery, is a scotch whisky.

The Association argues that the word “Glen” is too closely linked to scotch whisky for anyone other than Scottish producers to use. “Scotch Whisky” itself is a designation that is protected under the federal Trade-marks Act for use only with whisky produced in Scotland.

Now here's how Glenora describes their product:

Glen Breton Rare Canadian Single Malt Whisky is the only single malt whisky produced in Canada. It is produced by the traditional copper pot stills method using only three ingredients: Barley, Yeast and Water.

It can not be called 'Scotch' unless it is produced in Scotland, hence, Canadian Single Malt Whisky.

So does this mean that an excellent quality product that is clearly labelled as being something other than a "Scottish kilt" could still be objectionable if it were sold by a company called "Loch Ontario" (for example)?

BTW, from what I understand, the Glenora whiskey is quite good (but it's not scotch).

[Larry124]

I’m not sure that even if he gets what he wants it will make any appreciable difference.

To me the knee-jerk derogatory words used to describe economy kilts are offensive.
As are the off-hand words of exaggeration used to describe the cost of hand-made wool kilts.

Of course we know nothing of that here.

[Dirk Skene]

I understand the pride But it'll never fly.

[MacWage]

The article is about protecting "Scottish Kilt," not the term "kilt."

I actually AGREE with Howie on this one.
There needs to be a marked distinction between a tank and what the Gold Brothers sell over the counter on the Royal Mile (which is deceptively tagged as a Scottish Kilt, designed in Scotland).

We can STILL use the term "kilt" all we want and know what it is.

From the article:

If their attempt is successful it would mean that only kilts that were hand sewn, made in Scotland and made from pure wool could be known as a Scottish kilt. Those that did not meet the three criteria would simply have to be known as kilts. Mr Nicholsby, 29, said: "This campaign has come about through years of frustration. I grew tired of seeing poor quality kilts selling in shops on the high street for £20 and calling themselves Scottish kilts.

I can live with the term "Scottish Kilt" meaning: only kilts that were hand sewn, made in Scotland and made from pure wool could be known as a Scottish kilt.

Steve, Matt, and most American/Canadian made kilts would STILL be a "kilt," but would be somewhat distinct from a Scottish Kilt. Matt even tags his now as "Made in America of Scottish Materials" or the like (don't have the actual text or a picture of it at hand).
What "pushes" it are kilts like those made by Barb, Elsie, and Kathy. They are IDENTICAL in all virtually every way except in nation where the hand sewer resides.
I'd be curious as to Barb's take on this article and Howie's idea.
I can see where Howie is coming from and what he trying to "protect."
How does that affect Bard's creations? I'll have to ask her . . .

[McClef]

I can see problems with the three criteria in any case.

Is a kilt that is machine sewn in Scotland any less Scottish because of that one factor, even if it meets the other two?

What of a kilt that is hand sewn in Scotland that may have been woven by a mill outside of Scotland but still in the UK yet still out of pure wool?

What of a kilt that has been hand sewn elsewhere from pure wool material woven in Scotland by skilled kiltmakers as have been mentioned above?

As they say, "two out of three 'aint bad" and as we know, Gold Bros can't even manage one out of three!

[highlander_Daz]

It depends what context your using the word "Scottish" (Iam not keen that word anyway I much prefer "Scots" I am a Scot not Scottish!!

if the word "scottish" is used to describe a Kilt as a Scottish Kilt in relation to its country of manufacture or "Scottish" because of where its made. There is already a law against describing any item manufactured abroad as "made in Scotland", however the Goldies always put "designed in scotland" to get round it.

"if their attempt is successful it would mean that only kilts that were hand sewn, made in Scotland and made from pure wool could be known as a Scottish kilt"
what if the wool was from Ireland and the strops from china but made in Scotland. ?

all that will happen is the stuff will be sent from india or pakistan and pleated and straps sewn on in Edinburgh sweat shops.

it would be better just to educate people that the tut shops sell Rubbish and thats that.
I think its all part of Howies feud with the Singh/gold bros

[Monkey@Arms]

Since the problem is really about the perception of unfair competition in Scotland (and even more narrowly to the retail stores in Edinburgh) I don't understand why they just don't pursue truth in labeling laws about country of origin etc., as opposed to EU regulation.

Frankly I think the whisky or cheese analogies are poor ones, as one can argue that in some food products the place of manufacture is actually significant as to its flavor and characteristics, where as two kilts sewn by the same individual doesn't differ depending on where that individual is sitting.

Best regards,

Jake