A call to regulate the term "kilt"

[gilmore]

Trying to precisely define the term "kilt" is actually quite difficult. I've had conversations about this with the good folks at the STA in the past. I fully understand and sympathize with the need to protect Scotland's national garment and prevent false advertising (more on that later), but attempting to do so by limiting the use of the term "kilt" will create a nightmare.

Here's what I mean. Can you define a kilt by the amount of yardage? ...
Can you define a kilt by the type of cloth? ...

Can you define a kilt by where it is made? ...
Can you define a kilt by how it is made? ...

Of course you can define a kilt in any of the ways set out above, or any other way that you want to. Legislatures do it every day.

Every law school student has studied the case law that evolved after oleomargarine was invented, and competed in the marketplace with butter back in the early 20th century. Some legislatures were controlled by the dairy interests, some by makers of margarine. Creative laws were passed that protected and promoted sales of each.

Here in Georgia we have a law prohibiting the sale of any onions grown outside of a few counties in south Georgia as "Vidalia" onions. It is all quite legal, has been for years, and we have adjusted quite nicely without the onion market crashing.

As was noted , "champagne" is an appellation controlee, as are the names of dozens of French wines.

The only people having nightmares are those on the loosing end of these legislative fights.

You may not like it, but it can easily be done.

[RockyR]

post deleted... points already covered...

[ChromeScholar]

I suppose the kilt police could conceivably get such a law passed in Scotland. It would be ignored in the US, as it should be.

[Kid Cossack]

One thing that they seem to have overlooked. In the article they listed the examples of Parma ham and Champagne fizzy-water. Umm, isn't Parma a city? And isn't Champagne a region? So aren't we talking about specific geographical locations? Like prohibiting "Arizona beef" being applied as a label to cows from (gasp) Texas?

[Mr. MacDougall]

Like prohibiting "Arizona beef" being applied as a label to cows from (gasp) Texas?

"Arizona Jeans" are made in Mexico. "Arizona Ice Tea" is made in New York. It's a sad, sad world.

[sputnik]

"Arizona Jeans" are made in Mexico. "Arizona Ice Tea" is made in New York. It's a sad, sad world.

kind of like "Foster, Australian for beer" which is brewed in Canada.

Truth in advertising solves this whole problem. "Hand sewn in Scotland from Scotland wool" states the quality of the garment.

Over all, I am greatly troubled by the tone of elitism from several forum members. what is being said is that if i can't (or won't) spend as much for a kilt as you can (or will) then I am below you. whole thing makes me a bit sick.

[McClef]

Cheddar cheese is made everywhere but the little village in Somerset after which it is named.

The same applies for many other British cheeses.

Any legislation passed in the Scottish Parliament would only be enforceable in Scotland. This would of course have an effect on the misleading labeling activities of Edinburgh tat shops but if they moved their Internet supply business south of the border they could still merrily carry on with the same labeling.

[demobud]

As Makeitstop stated, the cheap kilt has its place. An inexpensive kilt is a "gateway garment" that opens potential for future customers of the more expensive kilts. Sure some people will never move past an economy kilt but you can't discount the fact that once a man wears a kilt, ANY kilt, he will soon want to move to better and more tailored garments. I wanted to get a kilt for years but never knew about SWK, SK, or USAK or any of the other less expensive models out there; being able to afford some less expensive kilts has cemented the desire for a tailored kilt, and I know I won't get just one. I say label it "Hand made in Scotland" and let it be.

[beloitpiper]

(from the article) A machine-manufactured kilt is still a kilt even though it's not as good as a hand sewn one. And, although I'm no fan of them, kilts made from, say black cloth instead of tartan, are still kilts. And if customers choose to wear a cheap version that is really little more than a lady's skirt, dressed up in all the trinkets, belts and buckles . . . well at least we can have a laugh at them.

I feel the exact same way! I love laughing at them!

[scoutniagara]

I feel the exact same way! I love laughing at them!

Go ahead, laugh at me, but I wouldn't ever laugh at you because you couldn't afford a "Hand-made, Scottish wool kilt". Grant kids me about wearing my pyjamas when in one of my SKs, but I don't wear a $700 Cdn. garment to do my weekly shopping, take the dogs for a walk or run errands about town.

I have nine kilts now, and only one is a 13 oz. hand-sewn Scottish wool kilt, but it was made by Margaret Struth in Barrie, Ontario. Is it a kilt?

Oh, but is a 13 oz. wool kilt a kilt? How heavy should the wool be for it to be a true kilt? 16 oz? Oh dear, what will come to be of the tartan mills who are weaving PV materials for kilt making? They may have to lay off employees 'cause you can't make "kilts" from PV material?