We are not affiliated with Kitanica

We do not sell their product

 

This is a non-commercial web page now.


What happened:

We were selling their product since 2012, having a dealership agreement. Until they changed the dealership rules last year so it was unrealistic to continue to work like that. So we just were selling what was left in our stock, since they do not buy back any of their unsold product. Additionally in the EU we as the seller were stuck with any returned products due to the EU 2 year mandatory warranty. Kitanica just off-loaded the product with very little support.

During the last few weeks we were threatened with legal action by Kitanica and forced to shut-down. All what we invested into the project went down the drain.

So as a customer, be aware of what type of company are you supporting by buying their product...

So as of now (18.10.2021) this page has no commercial application and based on both the US law and EU law is only an expression of freedom of speech. We will share our almost a decade long knowledge base, both on our personal and of others. Also our observations on the design, material quality and product. All information shared on this web-page can be backed up with documents and emails if queried (e.g. for a news article etc.)

This web page is not for sale, not to Kitanica. We told them we invested plenty into it, and they do not care. The best way how to treat someone who bought/sold about 100+ of their pants (not counting all of the other stuff).

We are not propagating any other brand here, just sharing what we know, have collected over time as feedback. There is no advertisement of any sorts here.

Kitanica's lawyers keep harassing us, maybe because they do not like any critique of their brand.


Footnote

Based on the local trademark law 441/2003, we do not have any commercial or otherwise relevant gain from this web-page. In our honest opinion the above stated law for trademark protection does not apply here, since it is an expression of freedom-of-speech.

Pursuant to Art. 9(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 and Art. 10(2) of Directive 2015/2436, any infringing use must be made “in the course of trade” (Pursuant to Art. 10(2) of Directive 2015/2436 and Art. 9(2) of Regulation 2017/1001), and “in relation to goods or services”. The examination of possible conflicts between the freedom of expression and trade mark rights is therefore pointless when the use of the disputed sign is not made in the course of trade or to designate goods or services, since these two conditions delimit the scope of exclusivity granted to trade mark proprietors.