Poor mans BLNR

[stix]

Just saw this in the BP. So, what do the judges say? :

[Belligero]

No comment

[James T. Kirk©]

If you want the blue-black diver thing, then go for something original in design like the Turtle or the upcoming Samurai rather than these fakes.

I'd go any day with a Seiko, with such more appealing and own design, then the ugly mercedes hands lookalikes...

[mjgerrard]

Interesting piece, presumably based on the ford gt?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Yes I believe so. It's one of the few Steinharts of old that go on Chrono24 for big money because there are few of them around. That and it isn't a homage to anything in particular I would say.

I can see the mention of the Gulf Monaco here which also takes inspiration from the same thing, which is obviously a chrono where the Steinhart is not.

I would happily buy both.

[RustyBin5]

My interpretation of a copy is; it shares more similarities than differences, and wouldn't exist without the original.

The Steinhart GMT fits firmly into the right coulmn, all of the items below exist because of the item to their left.

More similarities than differences ? Blueblack bezel and blue gmt hand. What other similarities are there?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ashleypriestley]

Yes I believe so. It's one of the few Steinharts of old that go on Chrono24 for big money because there are few of them around. That and it isn't a homage to anything in particular I would say.

I can see the mention of the Gulf Monaco here which also takes inspiration from the same thing, which is obviously a chrono where the Steinhart is not.

I would happily buy both.

It's definitely one that I haven't seen before

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[RustyBin5]

The date window's a little large on that for me.

The large number is the Ltd edition number showing your watch number so every one has a different dial


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RustyBin5]

;4399843]I'd go any day with a Seiko, with such more appealing and own design, then the ugly mercedes hands lookalikes...

It doesn't have Mercedes hands 🤦*♂️


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Belligero]

The large number is the Ltd edition number showing your watch number so every one has a different dial

[RustyBin5]

I know (obviously) but worth knowing the dial is unique for every watch also. Not many are aware. Certain numbers attract £ premium like 1 and 99 for example


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chrisparker]

More similarities than differences? Blueblack bezel and blue gmt hand. What other similarities are there?

• Black Dial
• White hour markers
• Triangle / dot / bar configuration hour markers
• White date wheel, black numbers
• Oyster shaped brushed metal case with crown at 3, with crown guards
• Oyster style bracelet
• Bezel construction, cermamic inlay
• Crown style logo above brand name

You could say these are all coincidence. It could equally have had a white dial, square black hour markers, green bezel, sub seconds at 9, aquanaut shape case, integral bezel, no crown guards, a HEV, PVD finish, a silicone strap etc. but it didn't - Steinhart's designers set about with a very clear idea on what they wanted to make, and the end result is obvious to most.

[stefmcd]

• Black Dial
• White hour markers
• Triangle / dot / bar configuration hour markers
• White date wheel, black numbers
• Oyster shaped brushed metal case with crown at 3, with crown guards
• Oyster style bracelet
• Bezel construction, cermamic inlay
• Crown style logo above brand name

You could say these are all coincidence. It could equally have had a white dial, square black hour markers, green bezel, sub seconds at 9, aquanaut shape case, integral bezel, no crown guards, a HEV, PVD finish, a silicone strap etc. but it didn't - Steinhart's designers set about with a very clear idea on what they wanted to make, and the end result is obvious to most.

It's also obvious they were not trying to clone the blnr, as they did with the standard sub.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[RustyBin5]

• Black Dial
• White hour markers
• Triangle / dot / bar configuration hour markers
• White date wheel, black numbers
• Oyster shaped brushed metal case with crown at 3, with crown guards
• Oyster style bracelet
• Bezel construction, cermamic inlay
• Crown style logo above brand name

You could say these are all coincidence. It could equally have had a white dial, square black hour markers, green bezel, sub seconds at 9, aquanaut shape case, integral bezel, no crown guards, a HEV, PVD finish, a silicone strap etc. but it didn't - Steinhart's designers set about with a very clear idea on what they wanted to make, and the end result is obvious to most.

You could be talking about literally hundreds of different watches with that list. How many of them are proprietary to Rolex. I mean.... black dial / white hour markers? Really? The original titanium500 (non gmt) was ironically heralded as being (finally) a non homage offering from Steinhart. This is based on that with obvious homage to the BLNR as pretty much everyone has agreed . are you seriously suggesting a black dial white hour marker watch = homage ? I really think you were clutching at straws with this list. No offence - but even the oyster case is completely different to Rolex's. lugs. Deeper case back etc etc. Anyway this is a circular argument as each will believe their own eyes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RAJEN]

Re: This is based on that with obvious homage to the BLNR as pretty much everyone has agreed .

I would replace 'homage to' with 'copy of' and then we can agree.
It is semantics actually but most prefer use of word homage to be limited to non current models.
OVM is a homage to older Rolexes, this is inspired by or copy of a current model.
To me neither is more objectionable than the other and both are fine.

[Wallasey Runner]

To me neither is more objectionable than the other and both are fine.

For someone who's happy, you're making a lot of noise.

Haven't you got an incoming that you need to go and collect

[RustyBin5]

Re: This is based on that with obvious homage to the BLNR as pretty much everyone has agreed .

I would replace 'homage to' with 'copy of' and then we can agree.
It is semantics actually but most prefer use of word homage to be limited to non current models.
OVM is a homage to older Rolexes, this is inspired by or copy of a current model.
To me neither is more objectionable than the other and both are fine.

But does copy not mean to replicate? There are so many differences. It's of COURSE inspired by / homage to (delete as applicable) the BLNR but the well documented huge list of fundamental differences means surely it's not a copy. The ocean 1 is a copy. This can't be or copy means something different? What would be helpful would be seeing the two side by side but I'm going out in a limb here and will guess nobody going to own both (despite their massive differences).

For the record I'm still pining for a BLNR lol - that hasn't changed. I'm aware my comments appear to be very pro Steinhart but actually I'm just trying to be accurate.

I think the term "inspired by" is better than homage. I agree


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RAJEN]

For someone who's happy, you're making a lot of noise.

Haven't you got an incoming that you need to go and collect

Did you already ship your Speedy Tuesday to me?:-)

[Saint-Just]

It's not inspired. It's a copy with a few variations. Furthermore, if in any doubt the other watches produced by that company would lift them.

I have no problem in Steinhart doing it but I struggle to understand those who deny it under the pretence that there are a few differences

[julian2002]

[stefmcd]

It's not inspired. It's a copy with a few variations. Furthermore, if in any doubt the other watches produced by that company would lift them.

I have no problem in Steinhart doing it but I struggle to understand those who deny it under the pretence that there are a few differences

Few variations ...... But not a few differences.... You'll need to clarify that contradiction.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[Dave+63]

I think we're all just arguing over the definition of "copy" here.

For some, a copy has to be pretty much identical, for others a passing resemblance is good enough.

[Saint-Just]

Few variations ...... But not a few differences.... You'll need to clarify that contradiction.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[stefmcd]

I think we're all just arguing over the definition of "copy" here.

For some, a copy has to be pretty much identical, for others a passing resemblance is good enough.

This is the nub of the issue.

Steinhart have made several models that have tried to cosmetically emulate the Rolex original part for part.

Here they have consciously decided to relatively restrain themselves by not doing so. That's resulted in putting me off a purchase. For me you either go hung ho and unashamedly copy or you don't. Others have expressed the opposite feeling I.e. it's sufficiently different to be appealing.

Time will tell whether their 'restraint' will pay off.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[Saint-Just]

Or maybe they had a friendly phone call from Rolex's solicitors.

[RustyBin5]

It's not inspired. It's a copy with a few variations. Furthermore, if in any doubt the other watches produced by that company would lift them.

I have no problem in Steinhart doing it but I struggle to understand those who deny it under the pretence that there are a few differences

Just cos there are so many differences as opposed to which has....well....none


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RustyBin5]

I think we're all just arguing over the definition of "copy" here.

For some, a copy has to be pretty much identical, for others a passing resemblance is good enough.

Last time I looked my office didn't have a photoresember - it did have a photocopier however. I think the meaning of copy is fairly cast in stone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[stefmcd]

Or maybe they had a friendly phone call from Rolex's solicitors.

I would be more inclined to believe this if their biggest seller, the ocean 1, had been changed since launch.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[Saint-Just]

Exactly. They have history.

This time they copied the same way, then introduced variations. Whether a design choice or an answer to lawyers I don't know. But it is clear that their range follows Rolex's with the Ocean1 black, green and red for the sub-dates, the Ocean1 chrono for the Daytona, the Ocean44 in black and pepsi, Ocean Ti 500 premium for the BLNR...

Once again, it is not an issue: they build and sell them legally, and the title of the thread is accurate. It's the deniers that I struggle to understand, who discuss on the semantics of copy vs homage.

[chrisparker]

Last time I looked my office didn't have a photoresember - it did have a photocopier however. I think the meaning of copy is fairly cast in stone

No it's not. Protecting Intellectual Property is a hugh business and many thousands of court cases will show the meaning of 'copy' is most certainly not set in stone. Whether it's a song, a dress, a story, a vehicle or a watch, people are going court everyday to argue over cases of infringement.

My agency has fought and won two cases of copying our work, and whilst not every detail was the same on the copies, there was sufficient evidence for a judge to agree that another agency had copied our work.

Take your photocopier (not photoresember), and you copy a colour document, scale it down and print it in black - you have yourself a smaller single colour copy - even though the paper, colour and size all differ from the original.

[radarcontact]

A personal opinion: Rolex is not entitled to that design. Yes, it is iconic and copied, more often than not, but hey to each their own. I see absolutely nothing wrong to wear similar design watches by people who cannot afford Rolex (or just do not want to spend this amount in cash on a watch).

There is a big difference between homages and replicas. The homage watches do not pretend to be something else. This topic is being beaten to death already on many instances and it always polarises people (sorry for my poor English, I am not a native English​ speaker)

In fact owning a Squale 30 AMOs GMT (it is a cracking watch, you receive much more than you pay for) made me to appreciate (and crave) a Rolex until I was able to get one. Now I own both, but have super respect for Squale (quality a and execution).

Now I enjoy these, 2 of them being a homages...

[stefmcd]

No it's not. Protecting Intellectual Property is a hugh business and many thousands of court cases will show the meaning of 'copy' is most certainly not set in stone. Whether it's a song, a dress, a story, a vehicle or a watch, people are going court everyday to argue over cases of infringement.

My agency has fought and won two cases of copying our work, and whilst not every detail was the same on the copies, there was sufficient evidence for a judge to agree that another agency had copied our work.

Take your photocopier (not photoresember), and you copy a colour document, scale it down and print it in black - you have yourself a smaller single colour copy - even though the paper, colour and size all differ from the original.

This doesn't seem to apply too strictly with cosmetic design or at least not in the watch world.

It's hard not to see MANY design copies in watches. Are companies simply choosing not to pursue legal action or are they unlikely to win?

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[Der Amf]

I wonder if the age of each design has something to do with the degree of variation introduced by Steinhart? Eg the old milsub design is decades old, so can do copied fairly closely, whereas the Mixed Berries BLNR GMT is recent design, and so has to have enough countable differences?

[stefmcd]

I wonder if the age of each design has something to do with the degree of variation introduced by Steinhart? Eg the old milsub design is decades old, so can do copied fairly closely, whereas the Mixed Berries BLNR GMT is recent design, and so has to have enough countable differences?

This seems plausible until you consider the closest copy is one of a current model - ocean 1 v sub.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[Der Amf]

This seems plausible until you consider the closest copy is one of a current model - ocean 1 v sub.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

Oh well, never mind

Recently some big Swiss company took Tourby to court to bar them from releasing an excessively close copy, and won. As a fan of Tourby watches, I was glad to see them being barred from clambering on to that slippery slope

[stefmcd]

Oh well, never mind

Recently some big Swiss company took Tourby to court to bar them from releasing an excessively close copy, and won. As a fan of Tourby watches, I was glad to see them being barred from clambering on to that slippery slope

That's interesting. Going to google that to see how strong the resemblance was.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[RustyBin5]

Exactly. They have history.

This time they copied the same way, then introduced variations. Whether a design choice or an answer to lawyers I don't know. But it is clear that their range follows Rolex's with the Ocean1 black, green and red for the sub-dates, the Ocean1 chrono for the Daytona, the Ocean44 in black and pepsi, Ocean Ti 500 premium for the BLNR...

Once again, it is not an issue: they build and sell them legally, and the title of the thread is accurate. It's the deniers that I struggle to understand, who discuss on the semantics of copy vs homage.

To be fair I don't think they copied THEN introduced variations. The titanium500 (original) has been around for 6 yrs or so. All of the variations are inherent in that model. Rather they said "let's do a BLNR thing - but with a twist" - so they adapted that one. The "changes" are not changes at all but are just the original design of the old 500. The result may have been almost an accident.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Der Amf]

That's interesting. Going to google that to see how strong the resemblance was.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

The info was all recounted to me by a friend who can read German - I think the full story is on one of the German forums. Sorry not to be more helpful. I can't even remember which Swiss company it was. It was a big Pilot, who does them? Zenith? iwc?

[chrisparker]

It's hard not to see MANY design copies in watches. Are companies simply choosing not to pursue legal action or are they unlikely to win

Unlikely to win I would think, that ship has sailed. For a successful case a company would have to state a claim as to their loss for damages, it's unlikely that Rolex would have lost sales to companies such as Alpha or Steinhart or suffered any damage to the reputation of their brand.

Then there's proving IP theft, easier if something is Patented but a general design approach isn't. And with so many Rolex copies now on the market a company could claim their design copies one, or many other brands on the market. You could effectively copy a Submariner without even seeing one, as there are so many other brands doing the same design now.

So big brands will choose to focus on protecting their registered trademarks like Omega do or thier patents like Apple do.

[UKMike]

All this talk of "copies" doesn't really apply when you place these watches side by side with a Steinhart - when you see they are clearly different sizes! (A bit like the joke about the two (insert minority group here) gents who bought two ponies and tried various means of distinguishing the animals when finally one of the aforesaid gents exclaimed that the black one was clearly bigger than the white one)

That was until the new Seadweller arrived - which is clearly an homage to the Steinhart.

[UKMike]

Unlikely to win I would think, that ship has sailed. For a successful case a company would have to state a claim as to their loss for damages, it's unlikely that Rolex would have lost sales to companies such as Alpha or Steinhart or suffered any damage to the reputation of their brand.

Then there's proving IP theft, easier if something is Patented but a general design approach isn't. And with so many Rolex copies now on the market a company could claim their design copies one, or many other brands on the market. You could effectively copy a Submariner without even seeing one, as there are so many other brands doing the same design now.

So big brands will choose to focus on protecting their registered trademarks like Omega do or thier patents like Apple do.

As an addition, I believe "Design rights" expire after 15 years from creation (or 10 years from when first sold) and "patents" expire at 20 years - nothing is forever.

[RustyBin5]

No it's not. Protecting Intellectual Property is a hugh business and many thousands of court cases will show the meaning of 'copy' is most certainly not set in stone. Whether it's a song, a dress, a story, a vehicle or a watch, people are going court everyday to argue over cases of infringement.

My agency has fought and won two cases of copying our work, and whilst not every detail was the same on the copies, there was sufficient evidence for a judge to agree that another agency had copied our work.

Take your photocopier (not photoresember), and you copy a colour document, scale it down and print it in black - you have yourself a smaller single colour copy - even though the paper, colour and size all differ from the original.

The watches are very different. It's already been detailed in what way ad infinitum. I don't think the use of black and blue constitutes intellectual property but I'd pay good money to see Rolex being stupid enough to pursue that lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk