Main St. Empire
Tacos and beer. That is all.
News
Does Lacoste use Sweatshops?
At this point, we're actually tired of these Lacoste posts. I would rather write about new music, or post pictures, talk about brands and shops and other random cool things, but we keep receiving emails with demands from them. Yesterday, March 31st 2012, we received yet another email from the Lacoste's lawyers demanding that we stop having opinions about Lacoste and to stop repeating them. Basically they are violating our 1st amendment rights, and they want us to just walk it off. Quite frankly, we are upset! We once again explained that our opinion and belief towards Lacoste's overseas business practices were only brought up to explain the thought process of a hand drawn design, after we complied to their cease and desist order. It had nothing to do with Lacoste directly, but more so to do with big corporations in general using sweatshops, or the belief that that they have in the past. After we complied with ALL their demands, they refused to comply with our simple requests. We ask our readers to take all the evidence from our our last three blog postings to make your own desicion. Does Lacoste use swaetashops? We really don't know, but we believe that many companies do and we have a strong opinion about that. We requested that Lacoste show us some proof that they have never used sweatshops in the past, but the documentation has been denied to us. Here's what Lacoste's lawyers sent us yesterday. Our response follows.
-Dear Mr. Sagastume:
I have received your email of March 8, confirming that you have complied with our cease and desist letter. I wrote to you on February 29 because the phrase “just gonna lay low” can have more than one meaning. Thank you for clarifying your intent.
I note that you have not provided any evidence to support your claims that Lacoste sells “slave made tennis gear,” “us[es] sweatshops in countries like Guatemala and India,” “pay[s] some of these people 8 cents a day,” “hire[s] kids, some [of whom] are missing limbs from working in the famous brand's manufacturing facilities,” “rob[s] these sweatshop workers of a quality life,” and causes “limbs lost, [and] lives destroyed.” In addition, you appear to be misinformed as to the ownership of Lacoste. Lacoste is not, as you claim, owned by Pentland. Since you cannot support these claims, please do not repeat them.
Further, having made specific, defamatory allegations about Lacoste, and having not been able to back them up, you are in no position to ask our client to provide you with proof or documentation as to the working conditions under which its products are made, and our client has no obligation to provide you with any such material or information. I have explained Lacoste’s policy on working conditions, which is confirmed on its website. If you have any reason to dispute this, I once again invite you to provide evidence to support your claims.
Finally, with respect to your own products, you claim the hats you bought in LA are marked “Made in USA,” but the phrase “Made in USA” may refer only to the plastic closure at the back of the cap. As for hooded sweatshirts, you deny that you sell these, but they are clearly shown on your website, although they do not bear the headless alligator logo.
Accordingly, Lacoste reserves all of its rights and remedies should you engage in any infringing conduct in the future or repeat any of your false and defamatory statements.
Very truly yours,
Richard Lehv
Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C.
866 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017
-Our response to this as as follows:
Gayle,
We received your email today on Friday, March 30th 2012, which is late considering we gave you 8 days from our last email on March 8th 2012 to get back to us on time. We were left no choice but to post the contents of that email on our blog as well. Lets get to the point though. We are not the only people that have been trying to get proof that LACOSTE USES SWEATSHOPS and we gave you evidence of that in our last email. That has been happening for years and you and I both know about that! Now it is true that we can't get physical evidence due to the fact that we do not have access to any of these facilities nor do we have a safe and trouble free invitation. That is typical of anyone trying to expose the use of sweatshops, but maybe you or 20/20 can help us out with that. The only resources we do have are real life situations and internet research to go off of. If that is all we have to reference, and you refuse to send us proof to change our minds, then that alone makes us BELIEVE that LACOSTE USES SWEATSHOPS or that they have used them in the past. Again it is our BELIEF and we hold that as a right as American citizens. How is that our fault or defamatory when you wont give us actual proof that LACOSTE does not use sweatshops or that they have never used them in the past? Now, your clients (LACOSTE) and your law firm can easily prove us wrong, but you choose not to. We find that to be weird and suspicious. The same could've been said about us if we did not provide you with evidence and pictures to prove that we ourselves do not use sweatshops. As you put it, "we think this will be in interest of the court.". That is what you were trying to do to us in your last email, but we complied and gave you hard evidence. You asked us to provide you with proof about our clothing brand and where we manufacture, which we openly gave you. On top of that, you gave us a rebuttal to our evidence, which was pretty ridiculous to say the least. We didn't have to send you that information and you were in no position to ask us for that as well, but we complied because we have nothing to hide. A question we want to ask is why is it up to us to prove that LACOSTE does not use sweatshops when you have all the resources at your disposal to prove us wrong? It makes absolutely no sense. All we want is proof or a public apology. Simple documentation can fix all this, but you chose not to produce any. Belief or not, you're making it too easy to pick a side. By the way, Gayle, it is also illegal to say something is "MADE IN" a certain country when it is not. If you are alleging we did this with our hats, and you're wrong, then we believe this will be in interest of the court. Now where is your proof and documentation that we asked you for? Oh that's right, you have no evidence to prove that LACOSTE does not use sweatshops or that they have never used them in the past. That is clear to everybody that has read our blog in the last few days. Thanks for helping us out with proving our point.
Now, everybody that we talk to, which includes employees from LACOSTE, think its very weird and pretty shady of you to just deny that LACOSTE USES SWEATSHOPS and not provide simple documentation to prove otherwise. You, nor LACOSTE have made a statement saying that they don't use sweatshops or that they have never used them in the past. Its all been runaround emails saying they follow rules and other BS. Rules are meant to be broken Gayle, and and quite frankly, your emails are a slap in the face to your own clients. If all we have to go off of is internet research and what we personally saw with our own eyes, and all you do is send these dumb runaround emails, then we have no other choice but to BELIEVE that LACOSTE USES SWEATSHOPS or that they have truly used them in the past. What are we supposed to do, just believe you? You're a lawyer! Prove us wrong. Show us some proof like we showed you. We once again invite YOU and LACOSTE to provide evidence to support your denial that LACOSTE USES SWEATSHOPS or that the have in the past. If you cant, then we will once again post every email you have sent us and let the public decide for themselves. We wont even have to tell people that LACOSTE USES SWEATSHOPS because you will be saying it for us. We thank you for that! Then you can file defamation charges against yourselves. And guess what Gayle, the public is going to look at whats available to them. Internet research and your lack of documentation that LACOSTE does not use sweatshops is all they have. What else can they go off of? The internet and your lack of documentation to back up your denial is all the evidence people need. I wonder what people will think? I wonder what your clients will think when our simple request to protect their brand name is damaged by their own lawyers. A simple clause on their website doesn't come close to the damage you have made by not providing physical documentation to show that your clients have never used sweatshops in the past.
Now, you're right about your clients having no obligation to send us this information and proof that LACOSTE does not use sweatshops, but to protect their brand name and good will, they should. That's why you sent us a cease and desist letter, because we were diluting their brand with a parody of a trademark as you say. Your law firm is doing a better job of diluting their brand name by not producing evidence to support your denial that LACOSTE does not use sweatshops or that they never have in the past. Instead, you turn a cease and desist order into a defamation case and PR nightmare for your clients? You're making your clients look like they're hiding something and at the same time making our point valid. You have no evidence to prove that LACOSTE does not use sweatshops or that they never have in the past do you? That is why we still believe, and even more so now, that LACOSTE USES SWEATSHOPS or that they have in the past. We will continue to believe this until you or your clients show supporting evidence to prove otherwise. Pretty simple. We don't even have to say it anymore.
Now, the only real reason we're even talking about defamation and sweatshops and federal court is because you sent us a cease and desist order, which we complied to. Then we posted that on our blog to explain the teaching and reasoning behind the design and the research to go with it. This upset your firm and apologies will not be given for that. We also will not retract any statements we believe in. The only statement we will retract is Pentland being LACOSTE's parent company, and we thank you for at least clearing that up. At this point, we feel you are now violating our 1st Amendment rights to free speech and it is quite upsetting! We think the court will be especially interested in this, especially after we complied with EVERY SINGLE email you have sent us. Again the only reason why we even mentioned LACOSTE and sweatshops was to describe the thought process of a hand drawn design we created from scratch. Your firm is blowing this way out of proportion and it is only helping us out. Now, one of the main reasons why we came to the United States is for freedom, to believe and say what we feel without the threat of being attacked for it. You are now violating our rights as American citizens and we will fight till our last breath to stand up against that. We will not have our rights violated and I think the general public will back us up on it. Also the fact that our 1st amendment rights supersede any trademark law in federal court. We are taking this very seriously and suggest that you stop sending us demands, especially those telling us what we can and cant say. Start producing evidence to help your clients out and we'll leave the defamation of LACOSTE to you and your firm. You guys have been handling that perfectly.
We will be contacting LACOSTE and any of their department heads we can reach with a personal email and letter with the contents of all our collected emails. We will also be posting this email to our site along with your contact information as well. This time, instead of US telling people that LACOSTE USES SWEATSHOPS, YOU will be doing it for us.Thanks Gayle. You have by Monday April 9th 2012 to send us the documentation we requested. If we receive another email from you, your clients, or your law firm demanding anything more from us, or your email does not have the documentation we asked for proving that LACOSTE does not use sweatshops and never has in the past, we have no choice but to let our community and media outlets know about this. This is literally harassment and a violation of our 1st amendment rights. We have broken no laws and we have already complied to your cease and desist order.
Take care of yourself,
TLR&Co.
Word Is Bond
-So what do you think about that? Does Lacoste use sweatshops? We invite you to send Lacoste and their lawyers an email with your thoughts and requests for the truth. Feel free to us send us an email to info@tlrandco.com and let us know your thoughts on the situation.
LACOSTE'S LAWYERS:
Richard Lehv: rlehv@fzlz.com
Todd Martin: tmartin@fzlz.com
Craig Mende: cmende@fzlz.com
Gayle Morales: GMorales@fzlz.com
This email is sent on behalf of Richard Lehv.
Dear Mr. Sagastume:
I have received your email of March 8, confirming that you have complied with our cease and desist letter. I wrote to you on February 29 because the phrase “just gonna lay low” can have more than one meaning. Thank you for clarifying your intent.
I note that you have not provided any evidence to support your claims that Lacoste sells “slave made tennis gear,” “us[es] sweatshops in countries like Guatemala and India,” “pay[s] some of these people 8 cents a day,” “hire[s] kids, some [of whom] are missing limbs from working in the famous brand's manufacturing facilities,” “rob[s] these sweatshop workers of a quality life,” and causes “limbs lost, [and] lives destroyed.” In addition, you appear to be misinformed as to the ownership of Lacoste. Lacoste is not, as you claim, owned by Pentland. Since you cannot support these claims, please do not repeat them.
Further, having made specific, defamatory allegations about Lacoste, and having not been able to back them up, you are in no position to ask our client to provide you with proof or documentation as to the working conditions under which its products are made, and our client has no obligation to provide you with any such material or information. I have explained Lacoste’s policy on working conditions, which is confirmed on its website. If you have any reason to dispute this, I once again invite you to provide evidence to support your claims.
Finally, with respect to your own products, you claim the hats you bought in LA are marked “Made in USA,” but the phrase “Made in USA” may refer only to the plastic closure at the back of the cap. As for hooded sweatshirts, you deny that you sell these, but they are clearly shown on your website, although they do not bear the headless alligator logo.
Accordingly, Lacoste reserves all of its rights and remedies should you engage in any infringing conduct in the future or repeat any of your false and defamatory statements.
Very truly yours,
Richard Lehv
Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C.
866 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017
This email is sent on behalf of Richard Lehv.
Dear Mr. Sagastume:
I have received your email of March 8, confirming that you have complied with our cease and desist letter. I wrote to you on February 29 because the phrase “just gonna lay low” can have more than one meaning. Thank you for clarifying your intent.
I note that you have not provided any evidence to support your claims that Lacoste sells “slave made tennis gear,” “us[es] sweatshops in countries like Guatemala and India,” “pay[s] some of these people 8 cents a day,” “hire[s] kids, some [of whom] are missing limbs from working in the famous brand's manufacturing facilities,” “rob[s] these sweatshop workers of a quality life,” and causes “limbs lost, [and] lives destroyed.” In addition, you appear to be misinformed as to the ownership of Lacoste. Lacoste is not, as you claim, owned by Pentland. Since you cannot support these claims, please do not repeat them.
Further, having made specific, defamatory allegations about Lacoste, and having not been able to back them up, you are in no position to ask our client to provide you with proof or documentation as to the working conditions under which its products are made, and our client has no obligation to provide you with any such material or information. I have explained Lacoste’s policy on working conditions, which is confirmed on its website. If you have any reason to dispute this, I once again invite you to provide evidence to support your claims.
Finally, with respect to your own products, you claim the hats you bought in LA are marked “Made in USA,” but the phrase “Made in USA” may refer only to the plastic closure at the back of the cap. As for hooded sweatshirts, you deny that you sell these, but they are clearly shown on your website, although they do not bear the headless alligator logo.
Accordingly, Lacoste reserves all of its rights and remedies should you engage in any infringing conduct in the future or repeat any of your false and defamatory statements.
Very truly yours,
Richard Lehv
Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C.
866 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017
This email is sent on behalf of Richard Lehv.
Dear Mr. Sagastume:
I have received your email of March 8, confirming that you have complied with our cease and desist letter. I wrote to you on February 29 because the phrase “just gonna lay low” can have more than one meaning. Thank you for clarifying your intent.
I note that you have not provided any evidence to support your claims that Lacoste sells “slave made tennis gear,” “us[es] sweatshops in countries like Guatemala and India,” “pay[s] some of these people 8 cents a day,” “hire[s] kids, some [of whom] are missing limbs from working in the famous brand's manufacturing facilities,” “rob[s] these sweatshop workers of a quality life,” and causes “limbs lost, [and] lives destroyed.” In addition, you appear to be misinformed as to the ownership of Lacoste. Lacoste is not, as you claim, owned by Pentland. Since you cannot support these claims, please do not repeat them.
Further, having made specific, defamatory allegations about Lacoste, and having not been able to back them up, you are in no position to ask our client to provide you with proof or documentation as to the working conditions under which its products are made, and our client has no obligation to provide you with any such material or information. I have explained Lacoste’s policy on working conditions, which is confirmed on its website. If you have any reason to dispute this, I once again invite you to provide evidence to support your claims.
Finally, with respect to your own products, you claim the hats you bought in LA are marked “Made in USA,” but the phrase “Made in USA” may refer only to the plastic closure at the back of the cap. As for hooded sweatshirts, you deny that you sell these, but they are clearly shown on your website, although they do not bear the headless alligator logo.
Accordingly, Lacoste reserves all of its rights and remedies should you engage in any infringing conduct in the future or repeat any of your false and defamatory statements.
Very truly yours,
Richard Lehv
Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C.
866 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017
Dear Mr. Sagastume:
I have received your email of March 8, confirming that you have complied with our cease and desist letter. I wrote to you on February 29 because the phrase “just gonna lay low” can have more than one meaning. Thank you for clarifying your intent.
I note that you have not provided any evidence to support your claims that Lacoste sells “slave made tennis gear,” “us[es] sweatshops in countries like Guatemala and India,” “pay[s] some of these people 8 cents a day,” “hire[s] kids, some [of whom] are missing limbs from working in the famous brand's manufacturing facilities,” “rob[s] these sweatshop workers of a quality life,” and causes “limbs lost, [and] lives destroyed.” In addition, you appear to be misinformed as to the ownership of Lacoste. Lacoste is not, as you claim, owned by Pentland. Since you cannot support these claims, please do not repeat them.
Further, having made specific, defamatory allegations about Lacoste, and having not been able to back them up, you are in no position to ask our client to provide you with proof or documentation as to the working conditions under which its products are made, and our client has no obligation to provide you with any such material or information. I have explained Lacoste’s policy on working conditions, which is confirmed on its website. If you have any reason to dispute this, I once again invite you to provide evidence to support your claims.
Finally, with respect to your own products, you claim the hats you bought in LA are marked “Made in USA,” but the phrase “Made in USA” may refer only to the plastic closure at the back of the cap. As for hooded sweatshirts, you deny that you sell these, but they are clearly shown on your website, although they do not bear the headless alligator logo.
Accordingly, Lacoste reserves all of its rights and remedies should you engage in any infringing conduct in the future or repeat any of your false and defamatory statements.
Very truly yours,
Richard Lehv
Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C.
866 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017
This email is sent on behalf of Richard Lehv.
Dear Mr. Sagastume:
I have received your email of March 8, confirming that you have complied with our cease and desist letter. I wrote to you on February 29 because the phrase “just gonna lay low” can have more than one meaning. Thank you for clarifying your intent.
I note that you have not provided any evidence to support your claims that Lacoste sells “slave made tennis gear,” “us[es] sweatshops in countries like Guatemala and India,” “pay[s] some of these people 8 cents a day,” “hire[s] kids, some [of whom] are missing limbs from working in the famous brand's manufacturing facilities,” “rob[s] these sweatshop workers of a quality life,” and causes “limbs lost, [and] lives destroyed.” In addition, you appear to be misinformed as to the ownership of Lacoste. Lacoste is not, as you claim, owned by Pentland. Since you cannot support these claims, please do not repeat them.
Further, having made specific, defamatory allegations about Lacoste, and having not been able to back them up, you are in no position to ask our client to provide you with proof or documentation as to the working conditions under which its products are made, and our client has no obligation to provide you with any such material or information. I have explained Lacoste’s policy on working conditions, which is confirmed on its website. If you have any reason to dispute this, I once again invite you to provide evidence to support your claims.
Finally, with respect to your own products, you claim the hats you bought in LA are marked “Made in USA,” but the phrase “Made in USA” may refer only to the plastic closure at the back of the cap. As for hooded sweatshirts, you deny that you sell these, but they are clearly shown on your website, although they do not bear the headless alligator logo.
Accordingly, Lacoste reserves all of its rights and remedies should you engage in any infringing conduct in the future or repeat any of your false and defamatory statements.
Very truly yours,
Richard Lehv
Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C.
866 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017
This email is sent on behalf of Richard Lehv.
Dear Mr. Sagastume:
I have received your email of March 8, confirming that you have complied with our cease and desist letter. I wrote to you on February 29 because the phrase “just gonna lay low” can have more than one meaning. Thank you for clarifying your intent.
I note that you have not provided any evidence to support your claims that Lacoste sells “slave made tennis gear,” “us[es] sweatshops in countries like Guatemala and India,” “pay[s] some of these people 8 cents a day,” “hire[s] kids, some [of whom] are missing limbs from working in the famous brand's manufacturing facilities,” “rob[s] these sweatshop workers of a quality life,” and causes “limbs lost, [and] lives destroyed.” In addition, you appear to be misinformed as to the ownership of Lacoste. Lacoste is not, as you claim, owned by Pentland. Since you cannot support these claims, please do not repeat them.
Further, having made specific, defamatory allegations about Lacoste, and having not been able to back them up, you are in no position to ask our client to provide you with proof or documentation as to the working conditions under which its products are made, and our client has no obligation to provide you with any such material or information. I have explained Lacoste’s policy on working conditions, which is confirmed on its website. If you have any reason to dispute this, I once again invite you to provide evidence to support your claims.
Finally, with respect to your own products, you claim the hats you bought in LA are marked “Made in USA,” but the phrase “Made in USA” may refer only to the plastic closure at the back of the cap. As for hooded sweatshirts, you deny that you sell these, but they are clearly shown on your website, although they do not bear the headless alligator logo.
Accordingly, Lacoste reserves all of its rights and remedies should you engage in any infringing conduct in the future or repeat any of your false and defamatory statements.
Very truly yours,
Richard Lehv
Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C.
866 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017
David Vs. Goliath Pt. 2
First off we want to thank everybody for the support we have received concerning this bullshit Cease and Desist order from Lacoste. It looks like Lacoste, or their lawyers didn't like our last blog post and are still sending us demands. We find that amusing. This email was sent by ANOTHER one of their Lawyers, Richard Lehv. What a Dick. Below is the email we received and a nice and lengthy response from us, which we have still not gotten a reply to. We'll take that "W" and keep pushing. Enjoy.
-Dear Mr. Sagastume,
We have received your email of February 3, 2012, in which you say that you are “in the process of taking the #HeadsUp project down from [your] online shop.” Please confirm that you have permanently ceased use of the headless alligator logo to which we objected. In particular, please confirm that you will no longer sell or promote items bearing this logo, not just online, but also through dealers, by word of mouth and in any other manner.
We request confirmation that you will permanently cease such use because your blog says that you are “just gonna lay low,” which could mean that you will temporarily suspend sale and promotion of the logo, and might resume sale and promotion in the future.
In the absence of an unequivocal commitment by you permanently to discontinue your sale and promotion of goods bearing the headless alligator logo – which infringes and dilutes our client’s famous mark – our client will have no choice but to take legal action against you in federal court.
As for the statements you make on your blog about our client’s factories, please be aware that Lacoste and its licensees are opposed to human trafficking and slavery and take steps to ensure that such illegal behaviors are not taking place within the Lacoste supply chain. These steps include securing contractual commitments from all vendors to refrain from this type of behavior and to comply with applicable laws. Lacoste also has secured the right to conduct facility audits during visits, and to conduct unannounced audits using independent auditing agencies.
In your blog, you make false and defamatory claims about Lacoste and its suppliers, including that Lacoste sells “slave made tennis gear,” “us[es] sweatshops in countries like Guatemala and India,” “pay[s] some of these people 8 cents a day,” “hire[s] kids, some [of whom] are missing limbs from working in the famous brand's manufacturing facilities,” “rob[s] these sweatshop workers of a quality life,” and causes “limbs lost, [and] lives destroyed.” Please explain in detail what steps you took to investigate these claims before publishing them, and provide documentation supporting these claims. If you cannot provide an explanation and supporting documentation, we will assume that you have not done any investigation, and that you knowingly or recklessly published false and defamatory statements about Lacoste. We will add this to our legal action against you in federal court.
Finally, we note that in your email you say you “bought blank hats downtown.” We assume you also bought blank t-shirts and hoodies. Please describe in detail the steps you took to investigate and determine that the hats, t-shirts and hoodies you bought downtown were not made by slave labor, were not made in sweatshops, were not made by workers paid 8 cents a day, and were not made by workers injured on the job, and provide supporting documentation. In particular, please let us know the countries in which the garments you sell were manufactured and whether you visited the factories in which they were made. If you made no such investigation and have no such documentation, we think this will be of interest to the court.
We regard this as a serious matter. Please let us have your response on or before March 8, 2012.
Very truly yours,
Richard Lehv
Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C."
Here's our response:
-Richard,
We received your email last week on February, 29th, 2012. In our last email we sent you on February 3, 2012, we already confirmed that we discontinued the use of the "Headless Alligator" Logo you guys objected to, and we removed the "Heads Up Project" off of our online shop days after getting your cease and desist order. We have already complied to your cease and desist order and are confused as to why you are still sending us demands.
We have to assume, and honestly believe that you read our blog post, where we purposely posted the cease and desist order for our readers, and that upset you. We believe that is the reason why you are still making threats to sue. We're making a note of that, especially after we completely cooperated with your cease and desist order. We also believe that you have been jumping to conclusions. You are obviously, unfamiliar with street slang and its meanings, which is understandable. What we don't understand is why you only chose certain parts from our blog post to take out of context. That blog post was about how the design idea came about, not the cease and desist order. That was all you. In your email we received on February, 29th, 2012, you go on to say, "We request confirmation that you will permanently cease such use because your blog says that you are "just gonna lay low," which could mean that you will temporarily suspend sale and promotion of the logo, and might resume sale and promotion in the future.". I think you missed the very next sentence where we say, "I think that design might die happy.". The paragraph before that states, "....we're flattered that we at least caught the attention of the criminals in question. We feel we got our point across.". That should be enough evidence that we're done with the design. Also removing the item in question off of our site is proof that we complied with your cease and desist order. We have to assume that you are retaliating and still making threats to sue due to the fact that you read our blog and saw that we posted your cease and desist order. You quoted our blog, which means after you sent your cease and desist order, you checked back on our site to verify that we complied with so said cease and desist order, but failed to mention that we removed the "Heads Up" project off of our site. You obviously could see that if you took the time to read our blog post and go through all of our accounts in our Stocklists page and send them a cease and desist order as well. That means you checked all our links on our website. Did you check our shop link and see if the "Heads Up" project was removed off our site before sending us this letter? We believe you did, but you still are pursuing this issue and making threats to sue with no validity or proof. We really don't know what else you want from us. We have already complied with your cease and desist order and gave you confirmation of that in the email we sent you on February 3, 2012. We are done using that design and we have been since we got your cease and desist order. It got your attention. It has done all that it could do.TLR&Co. isn't using that design anymore. We have no interest in using that logo in question nor do we have interest in the promoting or selling it. I hope that appeases you.
Now as far as our belief and opinion on your clients overseas business practices, that is all based on actual life experience, extensive research and basic Google searches on sweatshops. It is not our fault that Lacoste's name frequently comes up; as well as their parent company Pentland. Lacoste isn't the only brand that has been accused of these type of practices. Well known brands like Nike and Banana Republic, among others, all use sweatshops, or have used them in the past. They just deny it and and have the capital to cover it up. By the time an audit is called on a sweatshop and the "Agency" touches down, the facility is cleaned up and cleared of any wrong doing. Quite honestly, if you have to audit your factories for any reason, especially bad working conditions, there is already a problem with the way the company is running their business. If your business is a "good" business, big or small, that shouldn't even be an issue to worry about. For years, Pentland and Lacoste have been brought up in bad light when it comes to this issue. Again that is not our fault, and we are not the only people that have said this or believe this. I'm sure you're familiar with R.I.D.E. Rural Institute for Development Education in India. Here's a link for you if you need to get familiar with what they do. http://ajws.org/what_we_do/service_and_travel_opportunities/volunteer_summer/documents/0511_india_ngo_profile.pdf. They also mention Lacoste and the conditions around their factories in India. Again, R.I.D.E. and ourselves are not the only people that believe this. You can not say that we made this up out of nowhere and you can not say that we are recklessly publishing and making false claims when it is a belief that not just one person or group believes in, and that has already been published in a public forum. It is our belief and our opinion, and we just expressed it in a different manner. We blogged about it. We are free to have our opinions and beliefs and we are free to express ourselves through blogging. That should be protected under our first amendment rights to free speech. We think this will be of interest to the court.
In addition to our online research and general google searches on sweatshops, where Lacoste's name gets brought up quite a bit, we are actually from Guatemala. We have family there now, and we are currently planning a trip in the next few months to go back and check out manufacturing facilities. I doubt, you can relate, but on our last visit, we traveled the rural and impoverished areas and bordering towns in Guatemala where Lacoste products were manufactured in the past. We have actually talked to people that have worked in these facilities. We have we have seen makeshift shops where vendors sold Lacoste products with Lacoste's labels sewn in which used to read "Made in Guatemala", as well as other brand's products side by side. When asked where these were manufactured and where they ship to, the vendor replied that they are made in a facility about ten minutes from town and that they ship all over the world. Now I don't know who runs these facilities, and what else they manufacture, but that was just our personal experience which made us think the worst of brands that use sweatshops. You could imagine the frustration we felt knowing this is happening to people just like us. That could have easily been one of us in that situation. We are lucky to have a voice to speak up against such cruelty. We did not need documentation to backup what we saw. That experience alone planted a bad opinion in our brain, and it would affect any human being the same way. A blog or internet research didn't plant that idea. The internet was just a tool that backed up our belief that much more, and it was a tool we used to express ourselves. We didn't make this up out of nowhere. It is out there in a public forum. Google it.
Now the last part of your email surprised us. You ask us to please describe in detail the steps we took to investigate and determine that the hats, t-shirts and "hoodies" we bought downtown were not made by slave labor, were not made in sweatshops, were not made by workers paid 8 cents a day, and were not made by workers injured on the job, and provide supporting documentation. In particular, you want to know the countries in which the garments we sell were manufactured and whether we visited the factories in which they were made. We would be happy to. First off, we never made any "hoodies" and are surprised you are making false claims and assumptions after accusing us of the same thing in your email we received on February 29th 2012. Its ironic to say the least. Attached are pictures of the blank hats we purchased from downtown which clearly shows the "MADE IN THE USA" markings on the closure.
There are many blank hat manufacturers in downtown LA where you can see that the hats being made were not made in sweatshops, were not made by workers paid 8 cents a day, and were not made by workers injured on the job. The Santee Alleys and the Garment District of Los Angeles does not look like a sweatshop nor does it resemble one in the slightest bit. It looks like a fashion district with hundreds and thousands of industry professionals buzzing around day in and day out. We have been there many times and the factories in the Downtown Los Angeles area are all around you as you shop. Many clothing lines manufacture out of this area. Out of all the factories we have been to, there was never any bad working conditions. I think it would be obvious to the other hundreds and thousands of people that walk through the fashion district if a sweatshop was in operation and pumping out blank hats. I think the word would spread rather quickly sir.
Lastly, our T-shirts are also made in the USA. We have been using American Apparel products since 2008, which has a manufacturing facility in Los Angeles CA. There, you can see the factory in person and buy your t-shirts directly from the same facility. I'm sure you are aware of their humanitarian outlook towards business and their good standing reputation as a quality made product and brand manufactured right here in the USA. We have been to their facility many times, where we could clearly see that their products that we used were not made in sweatshops, were not made by workers paid 8 cents a day, and were not made by workers injured on the job. They have a really nice factory and genuinely happy employees. They are paid a decent wage, they have a great cafeteria where they feed their employees and if they cant afford cars, they'll give them a bike to get to work. They are advocates for immigration reform and are actually looking out for their employees well being. American Apparel documents this heavily in their campaign ads and on ads they place on the actual outer walls of their factory. That is why we use them. Anyone can see their facilities and KNOW that they are not using any shady business practices like using sweatshops. They are a great American company made in Los Angeles. Attached is an invoice showing that we have not only been using American Apparel products for years, but that we have physically been to there factory in Los Angeles where you can shop, get a tour of their facility and pick up your order as well. We did all that.
Now in conclusion, we have met all your demands and have complied with your cease and desist order completely. With all that being said, we're still gonna believe what we're gonna believe, and that is our right as American citizens. We also have the right to express our views and beliefs however we feel. That is our 1st amendment right. The only thing that will change our outlook is proof. That will consist of a few things. We ask that you please explain in detail what steps you took to investigate that Lacoste and its parent company are no longer involved with the use of sweatshops and documentation to prove that they never have used them in the past. Also, we ask that you send us documentation on the most recent unannounced audit using independent auditing agencies in Lacoste's overseas facilities. If you can not provide us with this information, then we are left to believe that your clients truly have used sweatshops in the past and might do it again. We will also be forced to let our community know that we have complied with you and your clients cease and desist order, but that you and your clients have failed to produce evidence and documentation proving that their denial of using sweatshops is valid. As you say, we need "Documentation". If that is the case and you can not provide us with any documentation, a simple public apology to their customers and citizens of the world would suffice. We know that isn't going to happen.
The last note we want to add is a nice one, Richard. We actually believe that we could help Lacoste with their issues, they're branding, their new brand's (Lacoste Live) aesthetic and also the negative views against them. Lacoste has many resources and many ways to help the world and make an actual effort to appease us and advocates against sweatshop use. We would love to talk to one of their corporate representatives to discuss this further. Please let them know that we are reaching out to them to turn a negative situation into a positive one. We would hate to have an even worse opinion of Lacoste than we do already. Our last email we sent you on February 3, 2012 proved that we complied with your cease and desist order. Our blog post, that got you guys to send us this email we are replying to, explained the idea behind the design. And this letter proves that we are not out to hurt your clients well being or their business, its a world issue we are bringing to light. It also shows that we are willing to work with your clients to better their image hear in America and around the world. We hope to hear from them soon.
Please let us have your response on or before March 16, 2012.
Regards,
TLR&Co.
Word Is Bond
-They still have not replied to our demands which we find interesting. The point of a cease and desist order is to stop the dilution of a brand or a copyrighted logo, as they claim we were doing. Aren't Lacoste's lawyers diluting their own clients good will and brand name?. We believe so. We hope Lacoste sends their lawyers a cease and desist order for this fuck up. They need one. Really though, what more evidence do you need? This pretty much proves our point right? Lacoste uses Sweatshops and Lacoste needs new lawyers.
Feel free to send their representatives a letter. Let them know that their lack of producing evidence to protect Lacoste's "good" look is astonishing! Tell em to stop fucking with small American businesses and top using sweatshops.
Richard Lehv: rlehv@fzlz.com
Todd Martin: tmartin@fzlz.com
Craig Mende: cmende@fzlz.com
TLR&Co.
Word Is Bond.
David Vs. Goliath
As you know, we recently got hit with a cease and desist order by Lacoste for a design we created. It really wasn't about their logo at all either. It was about big corporate companies and brands like Lacoste using sweatshops in countries like Guatemala and India and so on and so on. The fact that they don't care about the people they hire really dilutes their brand name and also the quality of their good will as a company.
They pay some of these people 8 cents a day and charge over $70 for a polo shirt retail. They hire kids, some are missing limbs from working in the famous brand's manufacturing facilities. They literally charge an arm and a leg for their products. Its pretty sad. Whatever though, that isn't illegal. They're Lacoste. They can do no wrong. They are allowed to do this to people, I mean they help protect alligators in the wild. They care about things. Spare me the bullshit. They're allowed to rape you for your money and rob these sweatshop workers of a quality life. You know what's illegal? Using our 1st amendment rights to bring awareness to a huge problem. We're not allowed to parody a famous name or logo in fear that this will cause confusion or dilute the famous brand name/logo. I honestly think they're doing a great job of that by themselves already. We weren't trying to "infringe" on their trademark or copy their brand. We were making a point.
The headless lizard you see in our logo represents the victims of sweatshops. The limbs lost, the lives destroyed, the corporate greed we have all become accustomed to and the immoral business practices these companies are involved in. You know, the logo we created wasn't made to try and be like Lacoste or anything like there brand at all. We did it way different. Our look and aesthetic really set us apart from anything Lacoste has ever made. I feel like I should be able to hit them with a Cease and Desist order if they ever design anything remotely similar to what we did with our "infringing" logo. They cant be mad at that.
All in all, we're not mad about anything. We might be a little frustrated because we hoped to spread the word a bit longer, but we're flattered that we at least caught the attention of the criminals in question. We feel we got our point across. At least we hope we did. All we can do is talk about it and hope our friends in the media help us get the word out. Another Cease and Desist from Lacoste isn't shit to us. Until Lacoste publicly apologizes to the world for their bad business practices and confesses to their use of sweatshops, we will be here to let them know how stupid they look when they try to defend their brand name and precious logo.
In reality though, a huge campaign against Lacoste isn't even worth our time. The sheep and cattle are still gonna go and buy their over priced slave made tennis gear without a slight though of the victims behind the Alligator logo. They'll shut us down and people will forget about us and our voice will die with it. As long as we're here, those victims will have a voice, however small it is. At the end of the day this situation really just pushes us creatively to to keep designing and making some dope quality streetwear. Its just a few dudes behind TLR&Co. Its literally a David Vs. Goliath situation. Instead of fighting this C&D order and getting shut down by a tyrant company, we're just gonna lay low. I think that design might die happy. We'll keep designing new shit and pushing buttons. I kind of like that feeling too. Its motivating. You just switch it up on em.
As far as Lacoste goes or anybody related to their company, I hope they read this. I hope they lose an eyeball while doing so. Maybe then they can see how their sweatshop counterparts feel. Im my eyes, they're all pieces of shit for standing by a company that hides behind a cute little logo in their country clubs, talking up some racist ass shit for sure. Thats reality. They don't care about you. Lacoste uses sweatshops. Fuck Lacoste and everything they represent.
TLR&Co. Word Is Bond.
Below is a look at the Cease and Desist order which includes some pics they took off our site. This of course is from their American representatives. Enjoy. Please help us by spreading the word and thanks for your continued support.
LAXtoJFK Bootleg Collection
Our extended family and friends in the Southabay, LAX-JFK, just dropped their Bootleg Collection this past weekend. The homies have been slangin the shit out this line since it dropped. Highlights will include the Biggie and Pac Storm Trooper joints! Don't sleep on these though. Last time they dropped, they sold out quick! For now, the LAX-JFK Bootleg Collection will exclusively be sold only at Tradition. Other shops might get lucky in the near future. Support real Steetwear and cop that. LAX-JFK.
Agenda Long Beach 2012 Press Recap
We want to thank everybody that stopped by our booth at Primer at Agenda Long Beach. We had a blast. Here's some pics we found around the net. Enjoy.
Via: Swag Syndicate and Oh Snapbacks
Via: Afro Pics
Via: Invader
Via: Baller Status
Official None Left Video by Bambu produced by Josh The Goon
Check the Visuals to the None Left joint by Bambu and the homie, Josh the Goon. Hard shit.TLR&Co. at Primer at Agenda Long Beach 2012
Come through. We'll just be hangin around and talking shit. Primer at Agenda Long Beach 2012. 
#HeadsUp
So the homie, Young De AKA Demrick, just dropped his #HeadsUp project this morning after touring all over the world the last few months. Consider this a late Christmas/early New Year’s Eve present! We're extra hyped for this project for a couple reasons: 1. Young De is the homie, 2. We designed the album cover artwork, and 3. We will be releasing a limited edition collaboration T-Shirt for this project! We're currently taking pre-orders right now, but we'll give you more info on the drop shortly. For now, peep the tracklist and download the #HeadsUp mixtape here via On Smash.
01. Cake’n Up (De Gott’em) (Prod. by 21)
02. Money & Weed (feat. Brevi) (Prod. by DJ Fingaz, Bunson & Beaker Beats)
03. Go B!G (feat. Brevi) (Prod. by 21)
04. Liar Liar (feat. Brevi) (Prod. by The Dream Team)
05. Guilty (Interlude) (Prod. by Rikanatti)
06. Your The One (feat. Brevi) (Prod. by The Futuristiks)
07. In The Clouds (Prod. by Current)
08. BurnOut (Prod. by Jim Jonsin)
09. This World (Demo) (Prod. by FarHot)
10. Make It Happen (feat. Xzibit & Brevi) (Prod. by Current)
11. Can’t Always Rain (Prod. by 21)
12. Fight 4 Mine (Prod. by The Futuristiks)
13. Man On The Moon (feat. Xzibit) (Prod. by 21) (Bonus Track)
14. Back Again (feat. Xzibit) (Prod. by DJ Overtone) (Bonus Track)
15. Runway Walk (feat. Xzibit) (feat. Brevi) (Prod. by 21) (Bonus Track)
16. What It Is (feat. Xzibit) (Prod. by 21) (Bonus Track)
17. Find A Way Out (Prod. by 21) (Bonus Track)
[Download]
First Off
Welcome to the new TLR&Co. website and online shop! We know its been a long enough wait and we are hyped to finally offer everybody a consistent platform to stay up to date on everything we're up to. This of course will include exclusive online product and general news about the brand. Its been a crazy ride so far, but we couldn't have done it without support. We thank you for that. You alone have kept our dreams alive and have also motivated us to continue doing what we love. We, in return, will continue to provide you with bold quality goods that will definitely keep you looking and feeling your best. We'll also continue to piss people off and push our creativity to the threshold and beyond. Once again, thank you and we hope you enjoy the new site. Stay up. Now go buy some shit.
