After its name appeared on a boycott list, Petzl America said last week it does not support the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA; H.R. 3261), although it continues to back legislation that would help reduce the theft of intellectual property, production of counterfeit goods, and knowing sale of counterfeit goods.


Petzl felt compelled to disclose its position on SOPA Dec. 21 after discovering its name on a list of companies purportedly supporting the legislation. Petzl appeared to be referring to a list published by Boycott SOPA Sponsors, which also listed adidas America, Columbia Sportswear Co., Leatherman Tool Group, Marmot, New Balance Athletic Shoe Co., New Era Cap Co. Inc, Nike Inc., Oakley, Inc., Petzl America,  Red Wing Shoe Company, Reebok International Ltd, Spyder Active Sports Inc, Talylor Made Gold Company Inc. and The Timberland Co as SOPA sponsors and boycott targets.

 

As of Wednesday, it appeared that only about 200 people had pledged to boycott companies on that list, but there was also a growing tide of criticism of SOPA in the blogosphere and on e-commerce and technology news sites.

 
In February, 2011, Petzl did sign on to a letter circulated by the Outdoor Industry Association supporting government action against intellectual property theft via “rogue websites.” That letter made no mention of any specific legislation, and support for it was spurred by Petzl’s own encounter with the problem of counterfeit life-safety products.


When offering Petzl America’s support for such legislation, company President Roody Rasmussen stated in a Feb. 14, 2011, email, “Please include Petzl America as a signatory on your letter to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in support of their campaign to lobby congress for stronger legislation against counterfeit products that are appearing more and more in the U.S. marketplace.”

 

This email continues:


 


As you know, Petzl has had a long-standing battle with companies who have stolen and copied our intellectual property and product designs.

 
Until recently, this was only a problem with our headlamps. On Friday, we released information warning the consumer that counterfeits of products from our line of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) – life safety climbing gear – have been discovered. These counterfeit copies have the potential of putting lives at risk, as they are nearly exact duplicates of Petzl equipment, including our logo, but they fail at loads well below the safety standards set by CE and the UIAA. The loss of business from lost sales to counterfeiters pales in comparison to the risk these copies present to climbers, and the potential damage to the credibility of the Petzl brand, which has been built on the core value of producing the highest quality vertical safety equipment. You can find this warning at:
http://petzl.com/us/outdoor/news-2/2011/02/11/warning-regarding-presence-counterfeit-versions-petzl-products


 

To date, there have been no counterfeited products found in North America. If end-users purchase from authorized Petzl dealers, there is no danger they will be purchasing counterfeited Petzl equipment. However, purchasing from grey market dealers, buying used equipment, or purchasing from rogue Internet sites, puts the user at risk of obtaining these low quality fakes.

 
This example provides a solid case as to the growing dangers presented by counterfeited products and the potential harm they present to U.S. businesses and consumers alike. We appreciate the support of the Outdoor Industry Association and your efforts to address this problem by encouraging stronger legislation against pirates of intellectual property, production of counterfeited products, and the rogue web sites that support this piracy.


 

Sincerely,
Roody Rasmussen
President, Petzl America, Inc.


 

In it's Dec. 21 press release, Petzl America said it does not  support any legislation that would harm the freedom of the Internet, but reiterated that it is “strongly against counterfeiting, especially, as in the case of counterfeited Petzl products, where the safety of the end user is concerned. By extension, we are for legislation that would help reduce the theft of intellectual property, production of counterfeit goods, and knowing sale of counterfeit goods. However, we believe that SOPA and Protect IP do not address these concerns in a constructive manner.”