Expert witnesses carry out a deconstruction and examination of the jackets and give their opinion. Aero have had this done, and it was found that AL's size 38 Roadster pattern matches a 42 Highwayman exactly.
I was going to say something as it seems like the Aeros run larger in sizing comparatively to AL.Sorry, I've realised that's back to front. AL's 42 Roadster matches the Aero 38 Highwayman.
Based on what I have read so far, it appears that Aero has a myriad of legitimate and likely meritorious claims against WL and AL. By way of example, WL plainly converted (legal ease for stole) Aero's personal property (jackets, jeans, patches, jacket patterns, etc.), misappropriated Aero's trade secrets (jacket patterns and likely other confidential information that he learned as Aero's managing director), breached his fiduciary duties owed to Aero as its managing director, embezzled from Aero, wasted company assets (corporate waste), etc. I suspect that WL also infringed upon Aero's intellectual property rights.
AL's potential liability is slightly different. AL did not owe any fiduciary duties to Aero. Moreover, based on Sloan's chronology to date, it does not appear that AL directly participated in the theft of Aero's property (more may be revealed on this front). On the other hand, AL is likely vicariously liable for any wrongdoing engaged in by WL while acting as an employee, agent or representative of AL and/or in conspiracy with AL. I cannot tell from Sloan's account whether there is evidence that WL was acting in concert with AL before WL left Aero and joined AL -- while I personally suspect that WL and AL were acting in concert beforehand, proving it is a different story. Giving AL the benefit of the doubt and assuming that AL knew nothing of WL's wrongdoing before WL joined AL, AL still has civil exposure. For example, AL plainly knew, or at the very least should have known, that the numerous patterns that WL had with him when he joined AL came from Aero (where else could they have come from?). Even if AL didn't ask and didn't know, AL clearly benefited from the stolen/misappropriated patterns. Therefore, AL may be jointly liable (with WL) for misappropriation of Aero's trade secrets (and any associated intellectual property infringement), even though AL did not participate in the initial theft of the patterns. There may also be other civil claims available based on notions of unfair competition. Of course, if AL was conspiring with WL while WL was still at Aero, AL could have considerably greater civil liability, including for the conversion of Aero's patterns.
The civil claims against WL for conversion (theft), breach of fiduciary duty, and misappropriation of trade secrets appear to be no brainers. In fact, if the governing law parallels US law on the issue, WL's criminal conviction might constitute liable per se, such that Aero would not have to re-prove the claims for which WL has already been criminally convicted (because the burden of proof for a criminal conviction is higher than for civil liability). The misappropriate of trade secrets claim against AL also appears relatively strong (again, AL had to know that the patterns brought by WL to AL belonged to Aero).
Giles said:Whatever Will Lauder may or may not have done, has little bearing on what Alexander Leathers are doing. The court action was against Will Lauder as an individual and nothing whatsoever to do with Alexander Leathers.
If I was running AL right now, I would have already instructed my counsel to reach out with an offer to KC. No admission of infringements, just financial compensation and let's put this behind us... it's going to be very hard to separate themselves from WL and I'd be hoping that KC was reserving most of his rage for WL.
You forgot to ask how that former employee poached IH from Aero, what sort of deal IH got for switching to the newcomer. Lol. Depending on the evidence, that sort of poaching is actionable against the former employee and possibly the newcomer.Cross-Post from the AL thread on the IH Forum:
Giles,
FWIW, I have not seen any evidence thus far that you or IH engaged in any wrongful conduct. Will Lauder (“WL”) may not have properly accounted for IH’s dealings with Aero before his departure (I have no idea), but that is not IH’s responsibility absent complicity by IH (and I have not seen any evidence of complicity). It appears that you/IH have cooperated with the investigation of this issue.
My primary criticism concerns your suggestion that WL’s misdeeds do not affect Alexander Leather (“AL”).
Respectfully, and based on what I have read about the three week trial, I strongly disagree. According to the trial testimony summarized on TFL by someone who sat through the entire trial, AL was a central component of the trial. By way of example, according to the summarized trial testimony on TFL, it appears that:
• WL attempted to broker Sandy Alexander’s purchase of Aero;
• When Ken Calder rejected Sandy Alexander’s bid to purchase Aero, WL stole Aero’s jacket patterns (after tasking an Aero employee with replicating the patterns over a six month period); and
• After he was caught stealing from Aero, WL founded AL (with Sandy Alexander) and employed the stolen Aero patterns at AL.
To be clear, my understanding of the above-stated claims is based solely and exclusively on the trial summaries posted on TFL, I have zero personal knowledge of any of the foregoing, and I have no idea if the foregoing is accurate. That said, if the reports of the trial are accurate, WL’s wrongdoing – for which he was criminally convicted – is clearly and inextricably linked to AL.
Moreover, one of AL’s founders, owners and managers is now a convicted criminal and, importantly, he was convicted of stealing from one of AL’s competitors. That cannot be ignored. If AL allows this convicted criminal to remain with the company, that would speak volumes about AL. IMHO, AL should employ all available remedies to disassociate itself from WL. Anything less suggests that AL condones WL’s criminal conduct. Of course, any ex post facto disassociation would not remedy AL’s prior involvement/wrongdoing, if any, nor absolve AL of liability/responsibility, if any.
As to IH, WL was clearly a key component of IH’s relationship with AL. WL established the relationship with IH, was actively involved in the design and creation of the joint venture jackets, and was IH’s primary contact. WL was IH’s guy. Thus, IH did business with a criminal. As stated upfront, I am not presently aware of any evidence that IH knew that WL was a criminal. However, IH now knows that WL is a criminal. IH also knows that AL’s founder, owner and manager is a criminal, and he was convicted of stealing from a competitor. Assuming IH was completely unaware of WL’s criminal conduct prior to the trial and conviction, IH is guilty of nothing more than unknowingly doing business with a criminal. This is not the first time that someone unknowingly did business with a criminal, nor will it be the last. Now, IH must decide how to proceed in light of recent events.
You forgot to ask how that former employee poached IH from Aero, what sort of deal IH got for switching to the newcomer. Lol. Depending on the evidence, that sort of poaching is actionable against the former employee and possibly the newcomer.
I know a lot of people, myself included probably would have been reluctant to dob in WL as he was their boss.....you never know how things like that will turn out and you may have just got yourself fired....
If one chooses to associate with pigs, they have to put up with the smell.I know everyone is excited and caught up in this kangaroo court, but the tarring of Iron Heart, and Giles in particular, is grossly unfair. We know Iron Heart collaborated with Aero, and Giles and Will obviously built a working relationship during that collaboration and maybe, heaven forbid, even became friends. Upon his return is seems Ken wasn't keen on the collaboration, so it fizzled and Iron Heart was short one leather maker to work with. Once Will was up and running with AL, why wouldn't Giles / Iron Heart rekindle that relationship with Will? The shoddy record keeping at Aero during the Aero/IH collaboration period is not IH's case to answer.
There has been no evidence that I've seen that Giles has done anything wrong, and to suggest otherwise, in my limited understanding of the law, is slander, isn't it? I have bought from both Aero and Iron Heart independently over the years, and have no vested interest in either, but let's just treat everyone fairly. I think sometimes it's too easy to forget that the names on the screen are people with lives, families, feelings, and livelihoods, so let's keep it civilised and stick to the facts.
I know everyone is excited and caught up in this kangaroo court, but the tarring of Iron Heart, and Giles in particular, is grossly unfair. We know Iron Heart collaborated with Aero, and Giles and Will obviously built a working relationship during that collaboration and maybe, heaven forbid, even became friends. Upon his return is seems Ken wasn't keen on the collaboration, so it fizzled and Iron Heart was short one leather maker to work with. Once Will was up and running with AL, why wouldn't Giles / Iron Heart rekindle that relationship with Will? The shoddy record keeping at Aero during the Aero/IH collaboration period is not IH's case to answer.
There has been no evidence that I've seen that Giles has done anything wrong, and to suggest otherwise, in my limited understanding of the law, is slander, isn't it? I have bought from both Aero and Iron Heart independently over the years, and have no vested interest in either, but let's just treat everyone fairly. I think sometimes it's too easy to forget that the names on the screen are people with lives, families, feelings, and livelihoods, so let's keep it civilised and stick to the facts.