NOT good for the industry as a whole... :(

[SpurHunter]

Commentary by Dave Henderson

May 19, 2010, 6:10 pm

After three years of presentations and often
rancorous testimony by experts on both sides, the
most contentious internal lawsuit in the history of
hunting industry is over. A judge has ruled that
Scent Lok clothing and others have legally failed a
sniff test and that their claims of odor-eliminating
technology are false.

The argument over the validity of carbon-lined,
scent-blocking garments for hunters has raged for
more than a decade. The industry has largely backed
the manufacturers' claims, largely due to advertising
money from Scent Lok and others.

But last Friday Federal District Court Judge Richard
Kyle of Minnesota ruled that ALS, the manufacturer
of Scent Lok clothing, had falsely claimed that it
products were based on "odor eliminating
technology" or were "odor eliminating clothing."

The word "eliminate" was key in the judge's
decision. Kyle ruled that the word meant "a complete
removal" --claims that were false and misleading
beyond any test of reasonableness.

Kyle's ruling also says that Cabela's and Gander
Mountain -- both of which sell Scent Lok and their
own private-label clothing -- are also guilty of
deceptive advertising.

An injunction barring ALS/Scent Lok, Cabela's and
Gander Mountain from "further deceptive practices"
will be issued. With this ruling, you can expect
other claims against the companies could move to
trial.

The case began in 2007 when six Minnesota
hunters filed suit against ALS and the others,
claiming their odor controlling clothing failed to
perform as advertised.

The suit alleged that the clothing did not eliminate
odor, and could not be "reactivated or regenerated
in a household (clothes) dryer after the clothing has
become saturated with odors".


According to Jim Shephard's on-line "Outdoors
Report," Kyle held that all advertisements that used
the words "odor-eliminating technology," "odor-
eliminating clothing," "eliminates all types of odor,"
"odor elimination," "remove all odor," "complete
scent elimination," "scent-free," "works on 100
percent of your scent 100 percent of the time," "all
human scent," "odor is eradicated," and graphics
demonstrating that human odor cannot escape the
carbon-embedded fabric are all false statements as a
matter of law.

In addition, the Court found claims that the Scent Lok
clothing could be "reactivated" to "like new" or
"pristine" condition to be false as a matter of law.

 

[AThornton]

Wow. Not surprised that it came out the way it did, but wow.

 

[foodsaver]

pardon my ignorance but why is it bad for the industry as a whole?

 

[SpurHunter]

Hard to pardon that much Craig but.....

This opens up ALL dealers who have sold this stuff to lawsuits and greedy consumers that want to make a quick buck will jump all over this and even bankrupt some or many of them.
You have to remember that most retail sporting goods stores sell fishing supplies as well, and if they are hurting from a financial judgements, do you think they can afford to expand or keep supplies in stock? Or stay open, or expand, or give raises to folks like DitchDoc that works for one of these guys. I think you get the point, but it scares me.

 

[rsimms]

Nothing personal here Spur... I know we're talking about some people's livelihood, hence it is nothing to make light of.

However, I respect decisions which protect consumers from false advertising claims. Most of us lack the resources to do any "scientific" product-testing of our own.

And I suspect virtually all retailers and wholesalers want to sell reliable, trustworthy products. I would think they might be glad to have some assurances that the stuff they chose to sell me, works as advertised.

P.S. - I believe most consumers would be wise enough to know that any liability is such instances would be on the manufacturers... not the retailers/wholesalers. And I pray any self-respecting judge would agree.

 

[SpurHunter]

Im not saying it was the wrong descision, Im saying its bad for lots of folks is all.
I can claim to be smart, as I never bought into the idea myself....I was too cheap! HA HA

 

[rsimms]

BTW... here is Scent Lok's response... they plan to appeal the ruling. I suppose the bottomline is that it boils down to the definition of the word "eliminate." But from the advertisements I've seen, I am personally left with the impression that Scent Lok wants me to believe that if wear their clothes (cared for appropriately), it will be impossible for a deer to smell me.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
FROM SCENT LOK's BLOG

Last week, the United States District Court in Minnesota issued an opinion in a lawsuit brought in September 2007 by five Minnesota hunters against ALS Enterprises, the manufacturer of Scent-Lok products, and some of its retail partners. The court ruled in ALS’s favor on some issues, and against ALS on others. On a narrow legal issue, the court determined that the word “eliminate” in some of Scent-Lok’s advertisements could only mean eliminate 100% of odor, and therefore some of these advertisements were false.

ALS respectfully disagrees with the court’s ruling that “odor eliminate” can only mean 100% elimination. There are many products on the market advertised as “eliminating” some condition and people understand that they do not eliminate the condition 100%. A search of the term “eliminate odor” produced over 1.9 million references to the term. A search of “odor eliminator” produced 281,000 results.

Of note, the court’s ruling does not relate to the efficacy of Scent-Lok products to perform in the field. Scent-Lok products work, and work well. Laboratory tests, including tests conducted in the lawsuit show that Scent-Lok carbon-containing clothing dramatically outperforms no-carbon clothing at adsorbing odors.

In a survey of Minnesota hunters conducted as part of the litigation, almost 80% of hunters who purchased activated-carbon clothing reported that they were very satisfied or satisfied with the performance of their odor control hunting clothing.
Survey experts noted that this score was very high for this type of survey.

Scent-Lok Technologies stands by its products and their ability to dramatically reduce human odor levels in the field to help hunters get close to game. Our extremely low return rate for odor issues suggest that our engineering is sound and our tests provide correlation to field success. That is why Scent-Lok offers an unconditional satisfaction guarantee.

ALS intends to appeal the court’s ruling and to continue to actively defend against this lawsuit.

 

[SpurHunter]

I agree with your assesment Richard. For what its worth....

 

[churly]

And this whole time I thought the deer couldn't smell me. Seriously, It sucks for ALS but it doesn't take a biochemist to realize that those clothes dont do exactly what they claim. I know that the carbon will absorb scents, and sometimes it wont let them go. I have a few carbon lined garments but like everyone else I cant afford it. Kinda glad someone is watching out for all us dumb, easily influenced big game hunters. BTW-I've killed more deer in a pair of blue jeans than anything.

 

[smalliemouth]

me too i never bought any of that type stuff i only buy new camo because of the fear of turkey seeing me the only way ur gonna fool a old buck is to become invisable and stop stinkin.

 

[churly]

...or just stay down wind like Papaw taught us!

 

[Kirk]

Dang it, I was just in the final stages of development of a scent free fishing suit. I was going to call it H2no.

 

[EricM]

popeyedpete - 6/8/2010 12:58 PM

Dang it, I was just in the final stages of development of a scent free fishing suit. I was going to call it H2no.

Boy, I could have used that!!!!

 

[Guest]

A lot of that stuff has been designed to "capture" the hunter or fisherman. I mean ya have to use some common sense when looking at some of these products. Unless you were in a totally self contained suit, your scent is going to "leak " out somewhere, either around your collar, or cuffs, and besides, I have killed deer in blue jeans like Churly said. </p>

 

[redcorn]

like others have implied, the hunting and fishing retail industries are reprehensible. Their advertising practices serve to attract yet deceive the average sportsman, whom they believe to be highly impressionable and ignorant. Every outdoors show i see on tv absolutely reeks of this greed, and almost every show host or personality has become a pawn in this game of deception. "scentlock" is just one example of a company making unscientific and untrue claims. I hope they get burned. Some might say "buyer beware", but i say liars beware. I believe the average outdoorsman would like to preserve our collective heritage. Surely i'm not the only one who's sick of all the "scentlock", "Cmere deer", etc. crap.