ripe and rosy ([info]colorwhirl) wrote in [info]knitting,
@ 2005-10-18 17:53:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Oh look, Knit Pixie is getting screwed...
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]terriblebeast.

(31 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]chymerikaen
2005-10-18 10:04 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, I saw that yesterday at their site. Small businesses pretty much always get screwed - they just don't have the money of the big corporations to hire lawyers and whatnot. I've always been a fan of small businesses and I'm a huge advocate of small local businesses!
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.

(Reply to this)


[info]malakym
2005-10-18 10:08 pm UTC (link)
Were they referring to KnitPicks?

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.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]colorwhirl
2005-10-18 10:22 pm UTC (link)
Why yes, yes they were.

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.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]eldil
2005-10-18 10:32 pm UTC (link)
I've only heard of KnitPixie very recently; I started ordering from KnitPicks when I first started knitting (four 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.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]webms
2005-10-19 01:39 pm UTC (link)
LOL! You are so right...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]margorand
2005-10-18 10:40 pm UTC (link)
Well they cut out the middleman, which saves a lot of money. But does KnitPixie sell only yarns that were produced paying workers living wages? (I don't know anything about the company so I'm honestly curious here) Just a cursory glance shows they sell yarns by Blue Sky Alpaca, which I believe uses products from Peru, which is also where Knit Picks gets most of their yarn from, IIRC.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]malakym
2005-10-18 10:42 pm UTC (link)
Threatening legal action can mean anything from a polite cease and desist letter to a full-out lawsuit. It's their responsibility as a business to keep up on possible infractions of their name, deliberate or not, in order to preserve their trademark.

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.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]tersa
2005-10-18 10:50 pm UTC (link)
I did some research to find out if KnitPicks is an evil large company. Granted, the info I found was on the Crafts Americana Group web page, but it looks like it is, at most, a company of 90 employees, so hardly a huge corporation.

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?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]tersa
2005-10-18 10:51 pm UTC (link)
KnitPicks might've sued

Er. Let's make that 'threatened legal action', because malakym had an excellent point that there is a wide range that phrase can cover of which 'sue' is only a small portion.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]margorand
2005-10-18 10:59 pm UTC (link)
Yes, I'm hesitant to tar Knit Picks with the 'evil exploitative corporation' brush for buying direct from the same mills that other yarn companies go through a middleman to buy from.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]malakym
2005-10-18 11:00 pm UTC (link)
And consequently, they may be able to pay the mills more than the middle men because there's only one line of profit.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]sistercoyote
2005-10-18 11:28 pm UTC (link)
Based on a whois search, Knitpixie has only been in existance since 2004; if KnitPicks has been around since 2002 they are rightfully defending their name.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]krysaia
2005-10-18 11:53 pm UTC (link)
According to a WHOIS, knitpicks.com was actually registered in 1999. The KnitPicks website says that they became a separate division of Crafts Americana Group in 2002.

So yeah, they have a right to defend their trademark.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]sismith42
2005-10-19 10:06 am UTC (link)
Is KnitPixie really older thank KnitPicks?

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 ;-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]chymerikaen
2005-10-18 10:26 pm UTC (link)
And the names really don't seem so ungodly similar to me that legal action would need to be threatened. I would think that the people in the knitting community would be able to distinguish between the two.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]ladypixel
2005-10-18 10:19 pm UTC (link)
Shame that Knitpicks decided to go after folks. I hate it when large companies do that. :(

(Reply to this)


[info]cuidado_llamas
2005-10-18 10:42 pm UTC (link)
You know, it's not like Knit Pixie couldn't have trademarked their name, too. They may be a small company but they're not totally defenseless.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]colorwhirl
2005-10-18 10:48 pm UTC (link)
No, they're not totally defenseless; but I still think this is just too much on KnitPicks part. Knitters aren't all stupid; most of us know the difference between "picks" and "pixie". (Hell, most children know the difference between "picks" and "pixie".)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]ferret_herder
2005-10-18 10:51 pm UTC (link)
Trademarking is comparatively inexpensive and easy, too.

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.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]malakym
2005-10-18 10:53 pm UTC (link)
Especially when heard word of mouth. I may hear it and type in "KnitPix" (which I actually do a lot) and be disappointed to find not direct from source yarn but reselling of other brands.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]sheisgone
2005-10-18 11:22 pm UTC (link)
Knit Pixie.. *ahem* kpixie seems to be taking this very gracefully. Another reason to continue shopping with them.

(Reply to this)


[info]myriadwhispers
2005-10-18 11:53 pm UTC (link)
I honestly can't say I see anything wrong with what KnitPicks did. It's perfectly within their rights to protect their trademarked property, ne? The two names do sound very similar when spoken aloud.

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.

(Reply to this)


[info]cimorenegal
2005-10-19 12:16 am UTC (link)
Frankly, i can see why Knit Picks would say something, but I don't think that they really would have any kind of case if knit pixie had decided to keep the name. The two names aren't incredibly similar.

And I would hardly call knitpicks a big company.

(Reply to this)


[info]thumbalina
2005-10-19 01:34 am UTC (link)
i feel bad for knitpixie, but they did what was in their best interest.

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!*

(Reply to this)


[info]clovecigarettes
2005-10-19 01:41 am UTC (link)
They should've changed their name to purlpixie. ;D

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]cuidado_llamas
2005-10-19 01:56 am UTC (link)
I like that idea.

(Reply to this) (Parent)
Just to point out...
[info]sternel
2005-10-19 04:32 am UTC (link)
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 =)

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Just to point out...
[info]jennnlee
2005-10-20 02:47 pm UTC (link)
As a fellow legal scretary, I say amen! ;-) Especially that lawyers should knit.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]stardust9121
2005-10-19 05:35 am UTC (link)
I was wondering about that when I got the e-mail. I admit, I couldn't figure out what company they would be talking about.


Now, here's the question - how are we pronouncing this new name? k'PIXie or KAY-pixie? ;)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]webms
2005-10-19 01:43 pm UTC (link)
I say they should be called the artist formerly known as KnitPixie...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]redmelde
2005-10-19 03:30 pm UTC (link)
k'PIXie sounds like a weird sneeze.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(31 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…