• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

#2 What Good Wear A-2 contract do you/have you owned?

What Good Wear A-2 contract do you/have you owned?


  • Total voters
    14

33-1729

Well-Known Member
I'm quite curious on how this will turn out. Mr Chapman has reproduced so many A-2 contracts I had to split this poll into two parts: This is #2, the road less taken.

Put in my vote!
 

Southoftheborder

Well-Known Member
I'm a bit surprised so many have had Donigers. At about the time I bought one S/H they were generally considered a bit odd and clown collars was a term used by some.

I had an Acme as well but that isn't on either list so I assumed ATC is the current version and plumped for that.
 

33-1729

Well-Known Member
"Acme" is code for "Aero" as John recognizes Aero Leather Clothing in Scotland being in operation. Aero Leather Clothing in Beacon, NY and Aero Clothing & Tanning in Brooklyn (ACT) are different companies, though John has used Acme for both. My ACT seems a bit tighter in the chest, maybe a common pre-war A-2 trait, so I separated them.
 

Southoftheborder

Well-Known Member
I knew he used Acme because Aero Scotland wouldn't let him use Aero. Though I think they did allow it at one time.

Still I didn't see the other poll at the time but it doesn't really matter.
 

33-1729

Well-Known Member
I knew he used Acme because Aero Scotland wouldn't let him use Aero. Though I think they did allow it at one time.

Still I didn't see the other poll at the time but it doesn't really matter.

John is being gracious. Aero Scotland has no legal rights to the name outside the UK. They never applied for a trademark in the US.

In the United States Gary Eastman filed for the trademark “Aero Leather Clo. Co.” in 2000 and this was abandoned 2003 (S/N 76101490) followed by FGF Industry S.p.A. filing for the trademark “Aero Leather Clothing Co.” in 2011 and abandoning it in 2012 (S/N 79096885). Mr. Eastman used the US contract label style and FGF Industry used the civilian label style of the original Aero Leather Clothing Co., Inc. in Beacon, NY in their trademarks.

1691330120749.png
 

33-1729

Well-Known Member
It's a shame because if you want an accurate repro really you want the correct label name. The again I'm sure John wouldn't want his craftsmanship to be confused with Aero Scotland.

Given Aero Clothing & Tanning (ACT) is a different company and has never been, as far as I've been able to find, trademarked anywhere in the world that might be an option but that's entirely up to John.
 

mulceber

Moderator
I seem to recall reading that Aero Clothing & Tanning was run by the same people and was an earlier iteration of Aero Leather Clothing. If so (and I admit, I'm having trouble finding where I encountered that, so take it with a grain of salt), then it's only sort of a different company. Legally yes, functionally no.
 

Chandler

Well-Known Member
I seem to recall reading that Aero Clothing & Tanning was run by the same people and was an earlier iteration of Aero Leather Clothing. If so (and I admit, I'm having trouble finding where I encountered that, so take it with a grain of salt), then it's only sort of a different company. Legally yes, functionally no.
I heard it was *some* of the same people, but not all. And I think I heard it from a pretty impeccable source... let me check my notes.
 

Spitfireace

Well-Known Member
What's in a name really? I have an Aero 15142-P made in Scotland with a label that is exactly like the original label from Beacon NY. Exact copy of wartime label. Does anybody have a copyright on it?
 

mulceber

Moderator
I heard it was *some* of the same people, but not all. And I think I heard it from a pretty impeccable source... let me check my notes.
Ah, that would be great. That's a fair distinction to make, but saying "different company" makes it sound like it was a completely different group from the New York area that just happened to have the same name, when really, there's a relationship between the two companies.
 

33-1729

Well-Known Member
I seem to recall reading that Aero Clothing & Tanning was run by the same people and was an earlier iteration of Aero Leather Clothing. If so (and I admit, I'm having trouble finding where I encountered that, so take it with a grain of salt), then it's only sort of a different company. Legally yes, functionally no.

Not quite.

In Sept. 1936 Louis Kramer, Abe Wolkowitz, and John E. Liebmann had a purely verbal agreement to enter the business of manufacturing leather clothing but didn’t have the means to do so. Beginning Dec. 1936 enter Emily Kramer, the wife of Louis Kramer, who carried Aero Clothing and Tanning Co. under her name in Brooklyn, NY. She alone had the means to provide a performance bond to enable obtaining government contracts, obtained the contract from the government, and outright purchased the machines, bought leather and trimmings and paid for the rent and payroll. In the operation of that business Louis Kramer acted as salesman, Abe Wolkowitz was in charge of production and John E. Liebmann had charge of the office activities, including purchasing and shipping. From the money she made from the government contract she gave her husband, Louis Kramer, $4,000 and loans to Abe Wolkowitz, and John E. Liebmann to start off their business. On May 18, 1937, the Aero Leather Clothing Co., Inc. was legally incorporated in Beacon, NY and Aero Clothing and Tanning Co. of Brooklyn was no more.

The key point is that Emily Kramer owned and led Aero Clothing and Tanning Co. and from that business endeavor provided the money so her husband and two associates could legally start up their own company call Aero Leather Clothing Co., Inc. They are not the same company run by the same person, but one was created to fund the start of the other. Quite a story.

Ref.: https://www.leagle.com/decision/19497628hatcm7541554
 

mulceber

Moderator
Not quite.

In Sept. 1936 Louis Kramer, Abe Wolkowitz, and John E. Liebmann had a purely verbal agreement to enter the business of manufacturing leather clothing but didn’t have the means to do so. Beginning Dec. 1936 enter Emily Kramer, the wife of Louis Kramer, who carried Aero Clothing and Tanning Co. under her name in Brooklyn, NY. She alone had the means to provide a performance bond to enable obtaining government contracts, obtained the contract from the government, and outright purchased the machines, bought leather and trimmings and paid for the rent and payroll. In the operation of that business Louis Kramer acted as salesman, Abe Wolkowitz was in charge of production and John E. Liebmann had charge of the office activities, including purchasing and shipping. From the money she made from the government contract she gave her husband, Louis Kramer, $4,000 and loans to Abe Wolkowitz, and John E. Liebmann to start off their business. On May 18, 1937, the Aero Leather Clothing Co., Inc. was legally incorporated in Beacon, NY and Aero Clothing and Tanning Co. of Brooklyn was no more.

The key point is that Emily Kramer owned and led Aero Clothing and Tanning Co. and from that business endeavor provided the money so her husband and two associates could legally start up their own company call Aero Leather Clothing Co., Inc. They are not the same company run by the same person, but one was created to fund the start of the other. Quite a story.

Ref.: https://www.leagle.com/decision/19497628hatcm7541554
I think you just gave a more elaborated version of what I just said. ;) My point was that saying the two Aeros are "different companies" without going into any details can convey the false impression that there was no relationship between the two companies.
 

Chandler

Well-Known Member
Here's an interesting thread from 2012:
 

33-1729

Well-Known Member
Here's an interesting thread from 2012:

I did see that, but the comments ". . ."it is possible they . . .", " . . . weakly supported . . .", etc. made me question the write-up and I dug a bit further. When I found the legal document, created under oath, it was clear Emily Kramer solely ran ACT and had nothing to do with Aero Leather though the write-up also said she had. The workers at ACT in Brooklyn aren't going to commute sixty miles to Aero in Beacon during the 1930's so we know of three employees that went to Aero from post #14 but I doubt many, if any, others did (especially since Werber was having strikes over pennies an hour in pay). Either way, I get mulceber's point that they're different companies and related. We're just overthinking it.

To respond to Spitfireace, there has been no copyright on the A-2 labels. There was a trademark on both the civilian and contract labels, but they both expired over twenty years ago as noted in post #7.
 

Chandler

Well-Known Member
@33-1729 -- I'm with you on there being two separate companies. I just posted that thread because it has posts about the division between owners.

BTW -- I've also heard that there's a Werber connection to the original Aero company... curiouser and curiouser. ;)
 

33-1729

Well-Known Member
@33-1729 -- I'm with you on there being two separate companies. I just posted that thread because it has posts about the division between owners.

BTW -- I've also heard that there's a Werber connection to the original Aero company... curiouser and curiouser. ;)

Yes! Besides the obvious of employees leaving Werber for Aero in Beacon (Werber was not well liked), it's amazing to think they're joined through arson, assault, and fraud. It didn't make much sense to me, but in one of the legal documents it mentioned Werber had a near lock on A-2 contracts and some funny business by Aero changed that. Mr Eastman discovered paperwork for a number of Werber contracts with no jacket survivors, but when you put them together it's clear what they were speaking about (below).

1691358137424.png


Some history is here


And a Werber court case is here

 
Top