I will admit I have a bias: I prefer the small crafters who actually pay their workers living wages instead of the Wal*Mart style discount house. Which is probably why I think knitpixie.com got the short end of this stick:
Why did you change your store name from knitpixie to kpixie?
We were approached by a large craft corporation who felt that our store name sounded too similar to theirs and they threatened legal action. We decided to change our store name in order to avoid a lawsuit.
Found
here with a tip-off from
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1)
terriblebeast.
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
October 18 2005, 22:04:28 UTC 6 years ago
People should remember to support them over ginormous corps like WalMart!
And that ends my rant for the power of small local businesses for today.
October 18 2005, 22:08:29 UTC 6 years ago
Because I could see why KnitPicks would need to protect their name and I've seen no indication that they're this big evil company out to get small businesses.
October 18 2005, 22:22:01 UTC 6 years ago
Why would KnitPicks need to threaten legal action against a company that had existed longer then they had? KnitPixie wanted to protect their name, too...but look who's getting bullied because they can't afford legal action like KnitPicks can.
KnitPicks is a discount house that buys yarn from countries that don't pay laborers living wages and instead produce yarn in horrible labor conditions with very low pay. How the hell do you think they can offer the prices they do? Someone is getting exploited along the line to feed our little habits.
October 18 2005, 22:32:57 UTC 6 years ago
How the hell do you think they can offer the prices they do?
Remember, the living wage in countries outside of the U.S. is a HELL of a lot lower than what it is in the United States. We can pay people $1 an hour and they'll live like kings. Unless, of course, they fall into the consumerist trap that developed countries do, and feel the need to buy new cars and iPods and DVD players and subscriptions to Livejournal and designer clothes, which necessitates a job that pays $20 an hour.
October 19 2005, 13:39:18 UTC 6 years ago
October 18 2005, 22:40:11 UTC 6 years ago
October 18 2005, 22:42:43 UTC 6 years ago
In terms of pricing structure, living wages in other countries are actually much lower than those in the United States. In addition, direct distribution to from these countries to Knitpicks eliminates other middlemen and branding companies and consequently the associated costs. It is possible for these prices to exist without evil and within an appropriate economic scale.
October 18 2005, 22:50:25 UTC 6 years ago
As eldil said, a living wage in Peru is way different than a living wage in the U.S.
I am in no position to know for certain if either company does it, but, as Margorand said, KnitPicks explained when they started coming out with their really inexpensive yarns that they were able to save so much because they cut out the middleman and went right to the source.
And, lastly, looking at the labels sold at kpixie.com, I would somehow doubt that the people producing Himalaya Yarn or the Recycled Sari are making any kind of better wages than the people producting KnitPicks brand yarn.
----
I can't actually tell when KnitPixie came into being, but, again, the KnitPicks site says they were formed in 2002. If KnitPixie was formed after that date, I can see why KnitPicks might've sued. Do you have any additional information which would verify that KnitPixie went into business before that date?
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
October 19 2005, 10:06:08 UTC 6 years ago
A freind of mine owns "Callahound Mortuary" in California.. he reccied a "cease and decist" letter from the Callahound Mortuary of South Carolina... to which he responded with proof that his buisness was 10 years older than theirs! If KPixie really is older, they could a)tell Knit Picks to shove it and b)return the legal threats ;-)
October 18 2005, 22:26:19 UTC 6 years ago
October 18 2005, 22:19:41 UTC 6 years ago
Deleted comment
October 18 2005, 22:48:56 UTC 6 years ago
October 18 2005, 22:51:33 UTC 6 years ago
Companies from Knitpicks all the way up to Disney have to vigorously defend against even perceived trademark infringements, or else they'll have little recourse when an obvious violation occurs and the infringer points out a history of laxness on the trademark holder's part. For instance, aspirin used to be a trademarked term back in the late 1800s (the "generic" name is acetylsalicylic acid, which is a real mouthful, and you can see why other companies making it would prefer the shorter word!), but it wasn't defended by Bayer, and now any company can call their acetylsalicylic acid "aspirin" without legal repercussions.
And yes, "Knitpixie" is pretty close to "Knitpicks" when spoken, certainly.
October 18 2005, 22:53:58 UTC 6 years ago
October 18 2005, 23:22:19 UTC 6 years ago
October 18 2005, 23:53:05 UTC 6 years ago
Why can't it be two businesses settling a dispute amongst themselves anyway? Why does it have to be someone getting "screwed"? You don't have to vilify one side just because you prefer the other.
October 19 2005, 00:16:36 UTC 6 years ago
And I would hardly call knitpicks a big company.
October 19 2005, 01:34:09 UTC 6 years ago
sure they could go to court over it and they would probably win because if it IS knitpicks they are refering too... they stand little chance since knitpixie has been around much longer.
however, through court costs, additional costs and all the time lost in court they would probably be forced into bankrupcy, which would make us all very sad.
in protest, i've decided not to use knitpicks for my holiday yarn order. *haarumph!*
October 19 2005, 01:41:32 UTC 6 years ago
October 19 2005, 04:32:13 UTC 6 years ago
Just to point out...
Welcome to the world of corporate law. It's not like where you and I live. It's a strange, dark world, filled with documents as tall as we are, and books that are never finished, because the law changes weekly, and people live off coffee and doughnuts (or in the case of my firm, bagels.)Having seen what the lawyers in my firm charge per hour (I'm a secretary, just to be clear!) I really don't blame Kpixie. The cost just to defend their name is immense. If you don't have a lawyer on retainer, forget it.
And on the other hand... precedent is everything in law. If KnitPicks was perceived to have a history of being lax in protecting their trademark, and they were in a more serious case, they'd have shot themselves in the foot by letting this one go. It's not necessarily right, but it's what is.
I think all lawyers should learn how to knit. It would calm everyone down. 0=)
October 20 2005, 14:47:30 UTC 6 years ago
Re: Just to point out...
As a fellow legal scretary, I say amen! ;-) Especially that lawyers should knit.October 19 2005, 05:35:23 UTC 6 years ago
Now, here's the question - how are we pronouncing this new name? k'PIXie or KAY-pixie? ;)
October 19 2005, 13:43:59 UTC 6 years ago
October 19 2005, 15:30:20 UTC 6 years ago