Just saw this.....Bark River is no more?

waynemanning74 said:
19 U.S.C. § 1304 (Country of Origin Misrepresentation): If an employee is aware that origin markings on a product are false, knowingly distributing them makes the employee liable to the same extent as the employer.


And I'm sure I could find more for ya!!
At the end of the day they are just as liable as he is. Hell the social media girl just openly admitted they knew.
Click to expand...
Not really:
  • The company/importer bears the primary liability as the regulated entity
  • An employee who alters a label at an employer's explicit direction would have a strong defense that they lacked independent criminal intent — intent to defraud or conceal is an element of the criminal offense
  • CBP and DOJ enforcement actions under § 1304(h) have historically targeted companies and their principals/owners, not floor-level employees acting under orders
  • An employee ordered to make the change could potentially assert a duress or respondeat superior defense
An employee directed by their employer to alter a country-of-origin label from "Made in China" to "Made in USA" bears no personal legal liability under well-established agency and respondeat superior doctrine. Under respondeat superior, when an employee acts within the scope of employment — particularly pursuant to explicit employer direction — liability attaches to the employer, not the employee. (Restatement (Third) of Agency § 7.07). The FTC's Made in USA Labeling Rule (16 CFR Part 323) places the substantiation and compliance burden squarely on the marketer/manufacturer, not its staff. Similarly, 19 U.S.C. § 1304(h), the criminal provision governing country-of-origin mismarking, requires intent to conceal as an element of the offense — an intent that belongs to whoever devised and ordered the scheme, not the employee executing instructions.

Further, under general agency law, an employee acting within the scope of their authority acts as the company, with legal consequences attaching to the principal rather than the agent. (Restatement (Third) of Agency § 2.01). Federal criminal and civil fraud liability both require that the individual personally benefit from or independently devise the wrongful conduct. A rank-and-file employee who receives no independent gain from the mislabeling, exercised no policy authority over it, and acted solely at the employer's direction satisfies none of these elements. Courts applying FTC Act Section 5 enforcement have consistently limited individual liability to executives with actual knowledge and directing authorityover deceptive practices — not subordinate employees carrying out orders. The employer is the liable party.
 
shinyedges said:
If you knew that your product may not be in the steel you are advertising it to be, how can you in good faith sell it to someone telling them it is said steel?
Click to expand...
My friend…

The knives that DLT was told were wrong have been pulled from their site.
Should they pull all the ones they bought steel for?
 
Sharp & Fiery said:
My friend…

The knives that DLT was told were wrong have been pulled from their site.
Should they pull all the ones they bought steel for?
Click to expand...
The reports of steel issues go back many years Coleman, well beyond what Mike is admiting now, he's a well established liar and thief. You are placing an awful lot of trust that he's been honest up until now.
 
Sharp & Fiery said:
My friend…

The knives that DLT was told were wrong have been pulled from their site.
Should they pull all the ones they bought steel for?
Click to expand...
Maybe? How can they be sure they received knives made with the steel they paid for? You cannot trust anything a liar says.

Edited: shiny edges beat me to it
 
shinyedges said:
The reports of steel issues go back many years Coleman, well beyond what Mike is admiting now, he's a well established liar and thief. You are placing an awful lot of trust that he's been honest up until now.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying I trust Mike. I’m saying that DLT paid for steel, in a certain composition. Bought it from the manufacturer and was sent to BRK.

So are we are to assume that MS switched it out and sent DLT crap?
 
Sharp & Fiery said:
I’m not saying I trust Mike. I’m saying that DLT paid for steel, in a certain composition. Bought it from the manufacturer and was sent to BRK.

So are we are to assume that MS switched it out and sent DLT crap?
Click to expand...
Exactly, for all we know the steel he got from them went to a dealer in se Michigan because he was late on their order because he couldn't afford to get the steel. So he robs Peter to pay paul and send dlt chinesium.
 
And Chris, this is just me asking questions. I have no side. Just curious why people are all ready to kill another USA company based on speculation.

I’m not trying to get in an argument. Especially with a friend.
 
Armithius said:
I kinda feel like it's less what they're made from, and more that they're not what they say they are. If I'm paying for CPM154, I want CPM154. It'd be like ordering a hamburger and the restaurant serving you a mushroom burger while telling you that no, it is, in fact, a hamburger.
Click to expand...
Well, it looks like a hamburger, and they cooked it on a grill, so two out of three says it’s a hamburger. 😁
 
Sharp & Fiery said:
And Chris, this is just me asking questions. I have no side. Just curious why people are all ready to kill another USA company based on speculation.

I’m not trying to get in an argument. Especially with a friend.
Click to expand...
Coleman, even if you were a Mike Stewart fan and fought me over it I'd still have a beer with you my friend. I'm just explaining the reasoning people are looking at dlt maybe a little side eyed.
 
I think at the very least DLT should halt all sales on BRK product until the independent testing is completed. As others have said, even with testing being done now and all this coming to a head...it doesnt excuse the fact that Mike has been a con artist for well over a decade and still DLT and KSF deemed it fit to work with the man. Not just working with but investing into his company. They knew he couldn't buy from these vendors so they did it for him. Even knowing he had already burned all the bridges possible with the US steel manufacturers. If thats not a red flag I dont know what is. Hard not to see their point. You can't do buisness with a known con-man/criminal and then turn around and act suprised when he does what comes natural to him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMG
Imagine if he did. Hes already a thief and a liar, hes stepped on business partners before, but does he draw the line at dlt? Im guessing we'll never know
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMG
shinyedges said:
Coleman, even if you were a Mike Stewart fan and fought me over it I'd still have a beer with you my friend. I'm just explaining the reasoning people are looking at dlt maybe a little side eyed.
Click to expand...
Haha. Mike Stewart fan…haha! I liked that one. ;)

I can understand the side eye…questioning whether DLT knew is fine…but some are coming to the conclusion that they did know without proof of knowing.

Even accusations can hurt a business that didn’t do anything wrong, unfortunately.

If they did know, my opinion is they can join MS.
 
StuntDouble said:
Didn't DLT basically pay for whatever knives they have twice? Once when they bought the steel for BRK and again when the knives were finished?
Click to expand...
The cost of the steel is a tiny fraction of the cost of a finished knife.

It'll cost them twice when they buy back knives that they sold and can't get their money back from the manufacturer.
 
Sharp & Fiery said:
Haha. Mike Stewart fan…haha! I liked that one. ;)
I can understand the side eye…questioning whether DLT knew is fine…but some are coming to the conclusion that they did know without proof of knowing.

Even accusations can hurt a business that didn’t do anything wrong, unfortunately.

If they did know, my opinion is they can join MS.
Click to expand...
I get it, I think people expect for dealers with reasonable knowledge there could be bad products to maybe pull products and have them tested instead of keeping them listed.

I'm not buying any brk blades so I'm not in danger of spending 300 on a knife that is actually a2 instead of 3v or pot steel from China instead of a Crucible steel. For the people who are unaware though, not cool.
 
I'll add, there's a very good argument to be made all his knives they have in stock should be tested, not just the 6 models he admitted to.
 
shinyedges said:
The reports of steel issues go back many years Coleman, well beyond what Mike is admiting now, he's a well established liar and thief. You are placing an awful lot of trust that he's been honest up until now.
Click to expand...
Yes, but in this case, DLT bought the steel and sent it directly to the cutters, and I believe the heat treater before it all ended up back in BR’s hands as cut and heat treated blanks. I guess you can’t put anything past Stewart at this point; but if he sent Chinese junk back to DLT in place of the materials that DLT purchased, well that takes shitheel to a whole new level. And then where did the materials that DLT purchased actually end up?
 
Danny Linguini said:
Yes, but in this case, DLT bought the steel and sent it directly to the cutters, and I believe the heat treater before it all ended up back in BR’s hands as cut and heat treated blanks. I guess you can’t put anything past Stewart at this point; but if he sent Chinese junk back to DLT in place of the materials that DLT purchased, well that takes shitheel to a whole new level. And then where did the materials that DLT purchased actually end up?
Click to expand...
Robbing Peter to pay paul was literally his long term business plan lol 10s of thousands of knives at hundreds of places, if he had knives to send whose to say he didn't fill an order that was outstanding to long? Not far fetched at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top