Aero Leather Clothing trial update

[Capesofwrath]

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.

Well yes that I can believe. I didn’t mention that jacket because I thought it was a sized up Aero, unlike the A2 type. Although I would have put it at just one size from guesswork. A 42 HWM fits me the same as a 44 Roadster and measures up the same. The Roadster was bought a couple of years ago though.

 

[winterland1]

Sorry, I've realised that's back to front. AL's 42 Roadster matches the Aero 38 Highwayman.

I was going to say something as it seems like the Aeros run larger in sizing comparatively to AL.

 

[Blackadder]

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).

While many seem to focus on the pattern and the intellectual properties, there are many other secrets and confidential information involved in a case like this. Take for example,, the time and money spent by Aero in sourcing thru trial and error the right Talon repro from the right supplier. That former employee is bringing with him all information like where to source the right materials and how much Aero is paying for them to the new company without incurring any costs or spending any time. Also are the poaching of staff because the former employee would know exactly who to poach while an outsider would not.

 

[Superfluous]

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”).

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.

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.

 

[Sloan1874]

Wonder how long that'll last on the IH forum...

 

[Carlos840]

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.

Funny you should say that, but a couple months ago i had a telephone conversation with Steve Toohey, my brand new Cafe Racer was having issues that needed sorting...
As i said he was very nice and a real gentleman when it came to making things right, but he did pretty much blame the issues on his "previous production manager, will" who was not working for them anymore!

Makes me wonder if they "fired" him before the court date, hoping they could put as much distance between Will Lauder and AL as possible and avoid repercussions.

As much as i love my jacket, this thing is really making me wish i had never given them my business.
As much as i liked dealing with Steve, i can't help but wonder what kind of person will make 108 jackets while not being employed by the company, and then employ Will, knowing fully what he had done...
I told him last month i was soon going to order a second jacket in brown, this idea has gone down the drain! Never again will they see a penny from me.

 

[Blackadder]

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.

 

[Superfluous]

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.

Thats true BL. If WL pitched IH to move its business to AL while WL was still employed with Aero, that also could be actionable misconduct. Unfortunately, these types of claims are very difficult to prove absent written communications which rarely exist (usually because the e-mails are destroyed). I was recently approached by a very well know and successful sports agent whose partner left their partnership and took two athlete clients with him who subsequently signed hundred million dollar contracts. The agent who approached me strongly believed that his former partner had contacted the athletes in advance, and secured their agreement to move with him, before he left the partnership. Unfortunately, there was no way to prove this advance agreement.

 

[Big J]

Just read the latest installment on the trial thread.
It absolutely beggars belief that so many people knew what WL was doing but didn't see it as illegal (remember, as shareholders, he was stealing from them!), and seem to have shot the messenger, KC!
I would have just called the police straight away.

 

[ProteinNerd]

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....

 

[Fanch]

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....

Maybe too a sad case of misplaced loyalty by a number of the worker bees. [huh]

 

[mattp]

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.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

I would think that some also felt caught in the middle. All of a sudden the old boss comes back to confront the new boss. I would imagine that most workers just had been doing what they had always done at work with little choice but to look the other way with how some things had been going. Most probably would rather not have disruption or even confrontation...and had no idea what to do about it.
HD

 

[AdeeC]

It is very easy for staff to have misplaced loyalties to corrupt bosses who manipulate them. I can recall a situation when I was a union rep. There was a hospital facility manager who was stealing and ****ming everthing he could. He corrupted many staff including even senior depatmental managers. He involved them in his ****s, gave them inducements and also illegal drugs. Others in fear of their jobs looked the other way. He could charm as well as intimidate. As they were compromised, he knew he had their loyalty. Eventually he got too greedy and ****med some of his staff. They complained. His grand schemes collapsed. We got 65 witness statements against him. He was moved on and the police investigated. In end he got away with it as he pretended to have brain cancer. When it was all over he had a miraculous recovery. He was a most slippery person.

 

[AdeeC]

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.

If one chooses to associate with pigs, they have to put up with the smell.
IH has not been forthcoming in presenting their side of the story as yet.

 

[Ishmael]

I've heard of a book that explores some of these themes....

“...when a man suspects any wrong, it sometimes happens that if he be already involved in the matter, he insensibly strives to cover up his suspicions even from himself. And much this way it was with me. I said nothing, and tried to think nothing.”

 

[Big J]

I think many of you are giving way too much benefit of the doubt, and apologizing for people.
Will was stealing from the company.
These people are shareholders in that company.
Therefore, Will was stealing from them.

But they seem to have been indifferent at best, and defending/rationalizing his actions at worst.

If they don't posses enough survival instincts to protect thier financial investments when faced with theft, they deserve to lose everything. Ken should have bought them out and fired them all, IMHO.

How do we explain this behavior?
Well, there was a discussion on another thread about people abdicating authority to prevent them having to take responsibility.

I think that's what was happening here. Like 99% of people, they were weak; they didn't want to have to deal with something nasty, they just wanted to carry on in thier little bubble with no responsibility. Hence, when Ken called the meeting, everybody tried to dodge the responsibility of even having an opinion and instead we see people attacking/undermining Ken since although he is in the act of protecting thier shared interests, he is the one bursting thier 'oh well, it's nothing to do with me' bubble.
The resent him for that out of thier weakness.

Summary, the fear of making 'trouble' is greater than the compulsion to 'do the right thing' even protecting yourself.

These people facilitated WL's crime. Idiots IMHO.
I'm ever so pleased that Ken was up for the fight and put things straight. He's a real 'good man'.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Somewhat disagree. I see the workers as more concerned with there safety..or security and weekly paycheck. However..some may view that as weakness.

 

[pawineguy]

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 have mixed feelings about your post, but I certainly do agree that we should remember that there are innocent people that shouldn't get pulled down by WL's actions. It appears, however, that IH was integral to this case, and that it was NOT shoddy record keeping. It was a lack of charging a customer for the jackets that they purchased, and then apparently or allegedly accepting denim as trade for those missing invoices. (a barter transaction) Per Giles' post today, it was HE who soured on the relationship and NOT Ken. I'm sure that Ken was not exactly happy with Giles upon his return, and again, from Giles post, it sounds like there is continued acrimony between the companies, and I suspect that Aero is not satisfied with the answers they have received about these transactions. Aero contacted them today to correct Giles' post!

So why, besides the obvious, is Iron Heart's switch to AL, along with other retailers who made the switch, so important? Because placement of your product when you are a new company is the path to instant legitimacy. And, from other posts I have read on here, the concern with IH doesn't seem to be about whether they were purposely complicit in any wrongdoing, it's more about "what now?" Do you continue a relationship with a company that was founded on lies, stolen information and poached employees? That's a legitimate question for potential consumers to be asking of their vendors, not only IH.

 

[Superfluous]

The company you keep is a reflection of who you are. The same holds true for businesses.