PDA

View Full Version : Just received a phone call.....



swanbourne
7th November 2006, 17:54
From Omega's attorneys in the USA. Bottom line is that if I don't withdraw my application for the BROADARROW trademark in the USA before the trademark office has ruled, Omega will pursue me for damages in the UK.

Whether this is a spurious action or not, it will tie me up forever and result in a High Court hearing during which I must be represented by a QC at enormous cost.

Although this latest and very direct threat suggests that they are by no means certain of successfully opposing my trademark application and don't want it put to the test, I'm not sure I can risk almost certain bankruptcy.

I hope there are some TV documentary makers reading this.

Eddie

Dave E
7th November 2006, 17:57
:shock:

Bastards!

Crusader
7th November 2006, 18:15
:shock: :evil:

Just say NOmega. :twisted:

rfrazier
7th November 2006, 18:26
Tough call. It would be very strange if they had much of a case in the UK, because it would be very difficult to show any damages. But, they might try to bleed you financially in the run up to the decision. And, in the UK, the loser pays both parties' costs, I believe. I would speak to my lawyer before making a decision. Indeed, I might speak to more than one.

(It clearly looks like bluster.)

Best wishes,
Bob

rfrazier
7th November 2006, 18:41
PS I think that they are just wrong in saying that you would need a QC. A barrister, perhaps. But even that is less than clear these days. (Soliciters can argue in front of a court now.) But, perhaps a British legal eagle can clear this up.

Being US lawyers, etc., its may be that they don't know how things work here. Do they know the law, and that if they lose here, they may have to pay costs?

I think I would have a long chat with my soliciter.



Best wishes,
Bob

Ron Jr
7th November 2006, 18:52
:shock: :evil:

Just say NOmega. :twisted:

I agree no more Omegas will be added to my collection. In fact I will strive to get rid of all of mine but two, have to keep my Fathers and my SeMP is just to loved.

Fschwep
7th November 2006, 19:41
Shame if the brand would vanish. I'll stick to my Broadarrows. And of course, you could send a link to this thread to a tv documentary maker... and to a few newspaper editors...

There must be corporate legal heavyweights around who are also WISs. I know of at least one. If you could find one he or she might be able to give you some tips as to how far corporate legal bullying might go.
Any international legal gun out there wearing a Broadarrow or Precista and reading this?

VA
7th November 2006, 20:32
That is an absolutely appaling action. I suggest we all stick together and send a letter to the newspapers, TV stations etc.

VA

swanbourne
7th November 2006, 20:41
That is an absolutely appaling action. I suggest we all stick together and send a letter to the newspapers, TV stations etc.

VA

I would be happy for this to receive maximum publicity.

Eddie

bambam
7th November 2006, 22:45
This is outrageous - corporate bullying of the worst kind. They must be worried that the ruling in the US will not go their way.

Am sure that everyone here will do whatever possible to help.

:evil:

quoll
7th November 2006, 22:50
Corporate bullies, of the worst kind. :x

The only consolation is the huge amounts of dosh Omega must be wasting on lawyers...

Dr.Brian
8th November 2006, 01:37
Eddie,

Perhaps it is time to say that you've made your point and move on.
Why risk your thriving Precista business for "Broadarrow"?
This may be a good time to bow out, but I am not sure how much you would have to spend to redial your existing stock. Maybe you could dump them all now onto a wholesaler to flog on ebay for the next few years. :wink:

One last thought... Is it "legal" for them to threaten you with another lawsuit if you don't drop your rights to "Broadarrow" in the USA. I would look into that question with a patent attny before you throw in the towel. It is possible that this blatant threat of further litigation if you don't withdraw your application is not allowed during your trademark hearing. Of course the burden would be on you to prove that they made the threat.

If it were me, I would probably not risk my business for a trademark that I did not need. Even if I was likely to win the lawsuit, the time headaches and costs involved would not be worth the effort, even if the costs would be returned a couple of years later after your victory. Are you willing to part with potentially tens of thousands of dollars for a couple of years? I would rather have them in my retirement investments than my attorney's.

-Brian

P.S. Before you agree to stop selling your Broadarrows, please let us know so that we have a chance to get one before they are gone forever.
I'm sure that your friends here would be happy to pick up a few, especially if there is a "fire sale". :)

raysablade
8th November 2006, 02:00
I don't know is someone has raised it before but this saga remainds me of a passage from Jerome K Jerome's, Three Men on the Bummel.

"If a man stopped me in the street and demanded of me my watch, I
should refuse to give it to him. If he threatened to take it by
force, I feel I should, though not a fighting man, do my best to
protect it. If, on the other hand, he should assert his intention
of trying to obtain it by means of an action in any court of law, I
should take it out of my pocket and hand it to him, and think I had
got off cheaply."

At the end of the day you're up against a perception of shareholders interests, rather a watch company that understands its business. You need to talk to lawyers but I suspect that the resources Omega's owners have at their disposal make the risks of procceding on your own too great.

abraxas
8th November 2006, 04:07
.
I certainly wouldn't think of you any less if you dropped the case.

(They were clever enough to threaten on the phone ... knowing you wouldn't be taping the conversation.)

Precista Rules! It'd be sad to see it go down chasing a broadarrow. :(

john

VA
8th November 2006, 08:48
That is an absolutely appaling action. I suggest we all stick together and send a letter to the newspapers, TV stations etc.

VA

I would be happy for this to receive maximum publicity.

Eddie

I guess, you can start by writing a letter to your local and a national newspaper, maybe your local MP, and TV station. At the same time we can start a petition or a blog where we can all sign and write down our thoughts. The letters, emails etc can be forwarded to Omega, or we can start a chain email and send it to Omega (along with a nasty trojan :wink: ).

I think in this case any publicity is good publicity. I' m out of the country now, but am most happy and willing to put my name down on the anti-Omega email, blog etc. I' m sure everybody else will be willing to do so.


VA

Crusader
8th November 2006, 09:20
While I have great sympathy for the notion that focusing on Precista and leaving Broadarrow behind may be a wise thing to do, there is a very uneasy sentiment in that someone can just take something away from you by threat, rather than buying you out which would be a much more honorable - and the conventional - thing to do.

I don't think I would feel nearly as hard about Omega if they made you a gracious financial offer. As it is, they invest their money in legal counsel who profit from threatening your commercial existence and strive to get what you own without financial compensation to you.

I find this fundamentally wrong, and reprehensible (not only morally, but also commercially - such business practices can hardly be good for a free market). :evil:

Griswold
8th November 2006, 09:34
It may be difficult for you to 'prove' that the threat was made, but it should be quite easy to prove that the phone call was made as all telcos have records of who called who when. It would then be up to them to say why the call was made, and I'd think they'd have to have a damn good reason - particularly if all previous correspondence was by email or letter.

I agree with others that you should get a legal take on this.

Of course, if you have the name and number of the person who called you, you could always call back and ask them to 'run you through their proposals again'. Whilst, of course, recording the conversation and having someone else listening in to it.

In any event, it may be pertinent to record any future telephone conversations with them.

Maybe a program like Watchdog would be interested in their shenanegans.

Seamaster73
8th November 2006, 09:46
I don't think I would feel nearly as hard about Omega if they made you a gracious financial offer. As it is, they invest their money in legal counsel who profit from threatening your commercial existence and strive to get what you own without financial compensation to you.

I would get a brief to write them a letter offering to settle for ?1m. See what they counter-offer before doing anything else.

swanbourne
8th November 2006, 10:10
They are adamant that they won't pay me a penny. I even asked if they were willing to buy my unsold stock and I would walk away but they refused.

The US attorney was quite explicit that unless I withdrew my trademark application before the US trademark office made a decision, Omega SA would commence legal proceedings against me in the UK and seek damages for:

1. Infringement of their trademark in the UK
2. "Tarnishing their image" (his words)
3. Loss of sales and revenue

Of course, it's OK to sell fake Omega on eBay and through the hundreds of knock-off sites.

Eddie

Fschwep
8th November 2006, 11:07
Eddie,

Perhaps it is time to say that you've made your point and move on.
Why risk your thriving Precista business for "Broadarrow"?
This may be a good time to bow out, but I am not sure how much you would have to spend to redial your existing stock. Maybe you could dump them all now onto a wholesaler to flog on ebay for the next few years. :wink:

-Brian

P.S. Before you agree to stop selling your Broadarrows, please let us know so that we have a chance to get one before they are gone forever.
I'm sure that your friends here would be happy to pick up a few, especially if there is a "fire sale". :)

I really don't understand why Omega does not want to at least allow you to sell your remaining stock, which I suppose will be no more than a drop in the ocean compared to the numbers they sell. After all they are not fake O's. But there is a tendency in 'big' business today that they no longer want to leave some crumbs of the cake to small competitors. In this case, the reason may be that someone like you proves on a daily basis that one can have a truly good watch made, and sold at least at some profit (I take it nobody in the chain is losing money on Precistas and Broadarrows?), for a fraction of the retail price of their products. In the discussions on the forum and the reviews they are openly compared, and favourably, with classic Omegas and other major, expensive brands. They may feel more threatened by that than by zillions of cheap fakes, as the latter will not be bought anyway by anyone a bit knowledgeable and with enough money to buy the real thing. But such a person might be inclined to buy a Precista or Broadarrow - and then talk about it.
What they are really trying to do is to kill your business alltogether. If they succeed in bleeding you dry they may get rid of Precista as well as Broadarrow.

I'd say, organize a fire sale in the upcoming months, mentioning that all remaining Broadarrow stock has to go NOW, that a limited number of x of each watch has ever been produced/remains and that they are all now officially limited series. Include a limited series certificate to that effect with each watch sold and offer each exiting Broadarrow owner the option to obtain such a certificate at nominal cost, based on their original invoice. Make it look good, put a big red seal on it, Omega/Rolex style. Given what has happened with the Dreadnought, they will then start showing up in the Sales corner and elsewhere, their value will increase and they will be discussed for years on forums as the watches that scared Omega into legal action. They will lose many more sales than you, and it will be years of bad publicity. And they can not touch Precista, which is an existing deposited brand. Let them eat their hearts out. And of course let the media know.

I am glad I already have two. :D :D

Crusader
8th November 2006, 11:15
I'd say, organize a fire sale in the upcoming months, mentioning that all remaining Broadarrow stock has to go NOW, that a limited number of x of each watch has ever been produced/remains and that they are all now officially limited series. Include a limited series certificate to that effect with each watch sold and offer each exiting Broadarrow owner the option to obtain such a certificate at nominal cost, based on their original invoice. Make it look good, put a big red seal on it, Omega/Rolex style. Given what has happened with the Dreadnought, they will then start showing up in the Sales corner and elsewhere, their value will increase and they will be discussed for years on forums as the watches that scared Omega into legal action. They will lose many more sales than you, and it will be years of bad publicity. And they can not touch Precista, which is an existing deposited brand. Let them eat their hearts out. And of course let the media know.

Interesting suggestion, Frank. :)

Oh, and


It's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than to be in the air wishing you were on the ground.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

bambam
8th November 2006, 11:51
You know this really grates with me - trying to kill of smaller businesses just because they can. As others have said, they do nothing about the fakes that openly circulate with their name on.

As a point of principle I would be inclined to fight - but then its not my business so I can argue points of principle.

Selling off existing stock as a 'limited series' is one idea, but whatever you choose, I'm sure that you will have the support of all those here.

Has this made it onto the fourms as yet?

Right behind you Eddie!

cricketer
8th November 2006, 12:08
The US attorney was quite explicit that unless I withdrew my trademark application before the US trademark office made a decision, Omega SA would commence legal proceedings against me in the UK and seek damages for:

Eddie

I'm surprised they telephoned you to tell you this, normally everything is put in writing. A bit strange I think. I'd say they are rattled.

They obviously think there is a fair chance that you are going to win with the U.S. trademark appl.!

I'm sure you will discuss with your lawyer. If they commence a damages action it can take months by which time your U.S. application may have been decided on, which surely would influence the U.K. action.

cheers

Alan

swanbourne
8th November 2006, 12:14
I'm sure they telephoned because they would not want to commit to paper that they tried to intimidate me into withdrawing my application through the use of threats.

No doubt they will now apply to the US Patent & Trademark Office for an extension of time for the submission of their trial brief (due next Tuesday), claiming that they are attempting to negotiate a settlement.

Eddie

bambam
8th November 2006, 12:21
No doubt they will now apply to the US Patent & Trademark Office for an extension of time for the submission of their trial brief (due next Tuesday), claiming that they are attempting to negotiate a settlement.

Eddie

If they do that will you be able to dispute their claims of 'settlement'???

swanbourne
8th November 2006, 12:27
Of course. :wink:

Eddie

Gert
8th November 2006, 13:05
:evil: [what Rob (NZ) would say] :twisted:

I agree that they most likely believe they're loosing. But of course you also have to make sure you can live to fight another day :?

Best of luck,
Gert

Fschwep
8th November 2006, 19:16
Hmmm... if there is already the occasional 'Zeno Broadarrow' showing up and they are apparently not sued by Omega for it (nor by Rolex for selling an Explorer), could you not just sell the Broadarrows as 'Precista Broadarrows', and have Fricker or whomever supply you with a number of new casebacks engraved Precista PRS-3/4/6/10/11 etc.? It would be a shame not to be able to sell your stock.

Michael in Frisco, Texas
8th November 2006, 22:11
I'm sure they telephoned because they would not want to commit to paper that they tried to intimidate me into withdrawing my application through the use of threats.

No doubt they will now apply to the US Patent & Trademark Office for an extension of time for the submission of their trial brief (due next Tuesday), claiming that they are attempting to negotiate a settlement.

Eddie

Perhaps, Eddie, you could send a note to said "lawyer", explaining that there must have been some kind of garble on you end, because you couldn't imagine that any lawyer would actively suggest any threats of the nature you believed you'd heard - explaining that you are confident the local Bar Association had ethical rules prohibiting such contact....

Not that you're looking to give them any way out, but to see whether they are stupid enough to repeat themselves....on tape....again.... :wink:

Dean in Canuckistan
9th November 2006, 06:19
Wow...

While I must admit to being a fan of Omega's watches, I have (after reading the entirety of this Forum) lost all respect for their business practices.

Congrats on keeping up the good fight Eddie! It is clear that you have much support from the WISs around here, and I am honoured to be among them (though, admittedly, the junior of the group).

But, along with others here, I too have come to the conclusion that Omega has impressive financial might which cannot be easily overcome (nee insurmountable), no matter how wrong they may be. This entails great risk on your part.

I'm with abraxas... your willingness to fight has proven your mettle. You would be respected none the less for leaving the fight now. In fact, some might see it as the more sensible option from a business perspective.

swanbourne
9th November 2006, 09:01
I have sent two faxes requested confirmation of the telephone conversation in writing and have received............................

Eddie

bambam
9th November 2006, 10:51
the deafening silence says it all really...chancing their arm...

traf
9th November 2006, 11:24
If they are serious about this, why haven't they already filed such a case in the English courts? If they are 'right' it would certainly have been more effective and cheaper than the route they have followed so far.

Barrel scraping springs to mind.

Also in future I would have no telephone contact with anyone pertaining to represent them. Let them put it in writing.

Gert
9th November 2006, 12:36
Also in future I would have no telephone contact with anyone pertaining to represent them. Let them put it in writing.

Good advice. If they call, tell them to put it writing and hang up! You'll never hear from them again :evil:

Cheers,
Gert

rfrazier
9th November 2006, 12:44
At the very least, you want their promise in writing, checked by your solicitor. The worst position would be to withdraw your claim in the US, then still get hit here.

Best wishes,
Bob

Michael in Frisco, Texas
9th November 2006, 15:55
Whenever we would get "odd" or "suspect" calls from counsel, we would usually draft a letter to the effect stating,

This letter will confirm our conversation of date and time, wherein you stated the following:

blah, blah blah, blah..

If this does not accurately reflect the conversation, please respond immediately in writing. If no written contradiction of this letter is received within 24 hours, we will assume that this memorialization of uor conversation is completely correct, truthful and accurate....

This invariably got the job done.

I am certain, however, that you have already done that, Eddie. Best of luck.... :wink:

Lemoneyewash
9th November 2006, 19:27
Whenever we would get "odd" or "suspect" calls from counsel, we would usually draft a letter to the effect stating,

This letter will confirm our conversation of date and time, wherein you stated the following:

blah, blah blah, blah..

If this does not accurately reflect the conversation, please respond immediately in writing. If no written contradiction of this letter is received within 24 hours, we will assume that this memorialization of uor conversation is completely correct, truthful and accurate....

This invariably got the job done.

I am certain, however, that you have already done that, Eddie. Best of luck.... :wink:

Spot on.

I'd also take some of the 'tactical talk' away from the forum.

Maybe a sub-forum (if possible) with password access only might be appropriate?

Crusader
9th November 2006, 21:22
I was under the impression that MBB was one of the foras visible only to the registered members, but perhaps that was a rash assumption.

I never bother to check without logging in ... got a postcount to maintain and all that. :wink:

Ron Jr
9th November 2006, 21:44
I was under the impression that MBB was one of the foras visible only to the registered members, but perhaps that was a rash assumption.

I never bother to check without logging in ... got a postcount to maintain and all that. :wink:

Nope just logged off and checked I could get in.

Squid Nunc?
10th November 2006, 03:01
Well, that's it. This has been going on too long for me to believe it's just small part of the company that is responsible for this BS and that the real people behind Omega (designers, watchmakers, etc.) have got nothing to do with it. The entire management must be supporting this, I can't support a company like that anymore.

It's a bloody shame. I've always loved Omega. Probably the brand that really got me crazy about watches. The Speedmaster Pro has been the #1 on my wishlist for as long as I have a list. I was this close to actually buying one brand new. I'm not getting one anymore, not until this whole matter is resolved in a positive way.

:cry:

swanbourne
10th November 2006, 09:20
I wouldn't let it stop me buying a watch if I wanted it. Whilst I have no doubt that Omega instructed the attorneys to oppose my application, I'm sure that the tactics are decided upon entirely by the attorneys to protect the enormous revenue they enjoy from Omega. They have been involved in dozens (perhaps hundreds) of trademark disputes on their behalf, not including the intellectual property civil cases.

Eddie

Guntram
10th November 2006, 18:26
This is bad news, Eddie - I am very sorry to hear that.

While I agree with what's been said before (everyone will understand if yu walk away from the case now), I'm just not sure about this:


From Omega's attorneys in the USA. Bottom line is that if I don't withdraw my application for the BROADARROW trademark in the USA before the trademark office has ruled, Omega will pursue me for damages in the UK.

I'm not a lawyer, but I've been involved with a lot of trademark issues businesswise. My understanding is that trademark legislation in the US and the UK is nearly identical (and as such very different from pretty much the rest of the world). So why would Omega think they have a better case in the UK? Or why would you think it'd be harder to fight them off in the UK than it is in the US? Maybe I'm missing a point here, but I'd think their threat is just as hollow as their case?

Guntram

murph7355
11th November 2006, 01:08
I'm new to the forum and only just seen this. Shocking behaviour on the part of Omega (the lawyers are working on their instruction - whatever "tactics" the lawyers employ are effectively sanctioned by Omega).

I'll not be buying anything else from their stable (which is a bummer for my other half).

Good luck with the case. It really does sound like they're concerned they'll lose, but I can imagine how stressful this must be for you.

Murph
(Sheffield, England :) ).

BruceS
11th November 2006, 13:56
Eddie,
I've just sent a link to this forum to a long time US patent attorney in DC who I know from The Rolex Forums and asked him to have a look. Maybe he can advise (he's probably one of the best in the US). He's a true WIS and a great guy, so I'm hoping he will come up with something.
Best of luck,
Bruce

swanbourne
11th November 2006, 14:08
Thanks Bruce.

Eddie

swanbourne
14th November 2006, 10:31
I received another call yesterday evening asking if I'd decided to settle. I said that before I could settle, I needed them to confirm details of the settlement in writing. He said, "I'm not going to do that", whereupon I said that if he wouldn't confirm settlement terms in writing, we had nothing futher to discuss and terminated the conversation.

I then composed another fax, detailing everything he had said during our conversations, asking him to confirm that my recollection was correct. He responded "I have received your facsimile of earlier today. I disagree with the statements made therein".

I have to confess to a degree of confusion.

Eddie

rfrazier
14th November 2006, 10:46
They are pushing pretty hard. Might they have an idea that a decision is coming soon?

Best wishes,
Bob

Griswold
14th November 2006, 10:51
I received another call yesterday evening asking if I'd decided to settle. I said that before I could settle, I needed them to confirm details of the settlement in writing. He said, "I'm not going to do that", whereupon I said that if he wouldn't confirm settlement terms in writing, we had nothing futher to discuss and terminated the conversation.

I then composed another fax, detailing everything he had said during our conversations, asking him to confirm that my recollection was correct. He responded "I have received your facsimile of earlier today. I disagree with the statements made therein".

I have to confess to a degree of confusion.

Eddie

I read in to that that he was acting either illegaly or without Omegas explicit authority.

Check with your solicitor.

rfrazier
14th November 2006, 10:55
Eddie, I notice that earlier this year, Omega won a decision to strike some of your exhibits, in particular ones found on the internet. (It looks like they were introduced in one category, but should have been introduced in another.) Were these instances of the BroadArrow being used in on-line sales, etc.?

Best wishes,
Bob

swanbourne
14th November 2006, 11:08
I could have used the exhibits if they were introduced by an "expert" as part of his deposition rather than as direct evidence. To be honest, they're not that important but being as Omega introduced their brochures, I thought I would like a few pictures of my own. :lol:

The US attorneys should submit their final trial brief to the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board today or risk having their case thrown out through late submission. They are submitting the same evidence they submitted for their application for summary judgement, which was refused. They can only submit evidence which they detailed in their "Notice of Reliance" and there was nothing new in that.

I don't think they want their evidence put to the test, hence the pressure and threats.

Eddie

rfrazier
14th November 2006, 11:25
I could have used the exhibits if they were introduced by an "expert" as part of his deposition rather than as direct evidence. To be honest, they're not that important but being as Omega introduced their brochures, I thought I would like a few pictures of my own. :lol:

The US attorneys should submit their final trial brief to the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board today or risk having their case thrown out through late submission. They are submitting the same evidence they submitted for their application for summary judgement, which was refused. They can only submit evidence which they detailed in their "Notice of Reliance" and there was nothing new in that.

I don't think they want their evidence put to the test, hence the pressure and threats.

Eddie

Ah. That explains things. Although the tests for summary and trial are different, it is an iffy proposition for them.

Best wishes,
Bob

bambam
14th November 2006, 14:17
Stand strong and ask for confirmation in writing exactly as you're doing.

Otherwise all they have are empty threats.

Dr.Brian
14th November 2006, 18:34
Eddie,
It is rediculous that they would think that you would be willing to settle without a written settlement agreement. What they actually want is for you to fold your hand, and hope that they don't sue you in the UK.
Without a written agreement in place, it seems unwise to withdraw your application.
If you really want to get out, you should have an Attny call them and find a way to get the "agreement" in writing. This is where a Lawyer could really help you solve the problem. Perhaps your Attny could draft the agreement for them to sign after you commited to it.
-Brian

Crusader
14th November 2006, 19:54
It is rediculous that they would think that you would be willing to settle without a written settlement agreement. What they actually want is for you to fold your hand, and hope that they don't sue you in the UK.
Without a written agreement in place, it seems unwise to withdraw your application.

What amazes/confuses me is that it is obvious that Eddie, even if withdrawing his case in the US courts, would still be vulnerable to a case being brought against him in the UK. :?

Any good lawyer - IMHO - would find in his client's interest to signal to a consenting opposing party that they would have nothing to fear if they accedes to the lawyer's proposition. :roll:

swanbourne
14th November 2006, 19:56
Thanks for your words of support and advice guys but I think now that the finishing line is in sight, I ought to see how it all ends. The arguments are now over an it's up to a group of impartial individuals to make a decision based on the facts. If I win, then I'll be happy but if I lose, then I know I gave it my best shot. If I folded and submitted to threats, I'd always be resentful.

Eddie

Crusader
14th November 2006, 19:59
Thanks for your words of support and advice guys but I think now that the finishing line is in sight, I ought to see how it all ends. The arguments are now over an it's up to a group of impartial individuals to make a decision based on the facts. If I win, then I'll be happy but if I lose, then I know I gave it my best shot. If I folded and submitted to threats, I'd always be resentful.

Eddie

That's the spirit, Eddie!

Sydney or the Bush!! :D

Guntram
14th November 2006, 20:09
A man who stands by his principles - what a rare quality these days. My hat's off to you, Eddie!

Guntram

swanbourne
14th November 2006, 20:30
Omega's attorneys have submitted their final argument.

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno= ... OPP&eno=38 (http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91158655&pty=OPP&eno=38)

I'll study it tomorrow, my brain hurts tonight. Meanwhile, if anyone has any relevant comments to make, they will be appreciated.

Eddie

swedeone3
14th November 2006, 20:54
Can't fight big government Eddie. Move on ole chap. :wink:

chrisb
15th November 2006, 10:57
Omega's attorneys have submitted their final argument.

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno= ... OPP&eno=38 (http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91158655&pty=OPP&eno=38)

I'll study it tomorrow, my brain hurts tonight. Meanwhile, if anyone has any relevant comments to make, they will be appreciated.

Eddie


Omega's attorneys seem to be implying

1) that Omega's customers are stupid
2) that Eddie's customers are stupid
3) that the court is stupid

Gert
15th November 2006, 12:31
Hm. In my understanding the key claim of Omega is that Eddie's application to trademark Broadarrow in the US should be denied because they were the first to use (but not register?) a similar name, Broad Arrow, also for watches.

I am not in a position to interpret the precedents quoted, but IMO the widespread use of the Broadarrow since the late Middle Ages would not make Omega the firsat user :evil: so their motion should be denied :x

Anger aside, the risk of Omegalomania, Inc subsequently going after Timefactors in the UK must be considered. Risk = Probability X Consequence :?

Best of luck, Eddie :)

Cheers,
Gert

Fschwep
15th November 2006, 12:38
Reading their brief, I would say they are in fact confirming the quality of your products. They state in so many words that the TimeFactors watches are 'identical' to Omega watches, the latter being a long-time and world reknowned maker of high-quality timepieces.

Translated into plain language what they are saying is 'This little guy makes watches that are as good as Omegas, and customers might be inclined to buy them instead of our products, which are sold at twenty times the price to pay for all the advertising by famous athletes, James Bond movies and all that crap - and so we want to stop him.'

They also state that customers might be confused into believing they are buying an Omega watch when buying a Broadarrow over the internet. Indeed, they imply that their customers must be stupid, and at the very least not really consciously interested in the product they are buying. Not very respectful.

However, there is a difference between being right and winning a court case when you are up against Big Money.

We now live in the Age of Litigation.

swanbourne
15th November 2006, 13:30
Some of what they say is simply copied from what they said 3 years ago. What was accurate 3 years ago isn't necessarily accurate today. For instance, in paragraph 24 they state that I sell Omega watches on my website when I haven't sold or shown an Omega watch on my site for 3 years...........

Eddie

bambam
15th November 2006, 15:09
As the finishing line is in sight then seeing it through is a positive course to follow.

Best of luck and I'm sure we all have our fingers crossed for you!

Cheers

8)

Fschwep
15th November 2006, 15:23
My feeling about this is that you ought to win if justice were truly done, but you are likely to lose. The decision to strike most of your exhibits on procedural grounds is ominous. In is in the interest of lawyers to stretch a case for years, generating income for all involved, and then to let the Big Money win. That way the latter will be inclined to fight the next legal battle, generating more income, etc.; and lawyers in a government trademark office may be employed by a private law firm tomorrow. However hard lawyers may fight to defend the so-called interests of their clients, in the end their goal is to make money, and fighting long battles at rates equivalent to one PRS-14 per hour is thus much smarter than winning (or losing) them quickly.

Many small watch producers would stand to lose if after this, Omega would manage to register not only the words Broad Arrow/Broadarrow, but also the broad arrow symbol as a trademark. It would not surprise me if they were to try that next...

:shock: :shock:

swanbourne
15th November 2006, 18:31
Fortunately this is being judged by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. They reach their decision based on the arguments submitted in writing and there is no hearing. There are no monetary awards or costs for the winner, they simply decide whether the applicant or opposer is entitled to the trademark.

If they win, I simply close down Broadarrow. If I win, there is a long queue of lawyers itching to take on Omega to relieve them of some of their cash on a "no win, no fee" basis. Of course, Omega could also close down "Broad Arrow". :twisted:

Eddie

GraniteQuarry
19th November 2006, 20:07
Just a thought Eddie - how about you form a new limited company and sell your stock to it and trade from there - any action raised would be limited to that company alone, no threat of personal bankrupcy. I'm sure what i've said is kinda broadbrush but this type of "sneaky" setup happens a lot to get round restrictive covenants and the like.

Cheers,
David.

A.Pottinger
19th November 2006, 20:54
Have been away and have just happened upon this thread...

I shall read it, however, though it appears to be a fait accompli (done and almost dusted as it were)

On the face of it, it seems that their lawyers were into scare tactics and pressure, with little substance, new at any rate, coming forward in support of their motion(s).

I find it difficult to forsee that they have a strong case, given the open nature of the use of this term 'broad arrow'. They were not the first to use, nor indeed to TM this, in my understanding. It has not been TM'd, is this correct?

Thus it comes to a right to use principle, imo.

The company formation in an interesting idea, Granite Quarry.

Fingers crossed and Best Wishes,

Pottinger :)

mrteatime
19th November 2006, 23:13
From Omega's attorneys in the USA. Bottom line is that if I don't withdraw my application for the BROADARROW trademark in the USA before the trademark office has ruled, Omega will pursue me for damages in the UK.

Whether this is a spurious action or not, it will tie me up forever and result in a High Court hearing during which I must be represented by a QC at enormous cost.

Although this latest and very direct threat suggests that they are by no means certain of successfully opposing my trademark application and don't want it put to the test, I'm not sure I can risk almost certain bankruptcy.

I hope there are some TV documentary makers reading this.

Eddie
Being a newbie and all that, why the F**k are omega taking such an interest? Have they taken the same action against alpha and all the other copies?

PDR
28th November 2006, 10:03
I think it is about 2 weeks since the deadline? Is there any news on the outcome of this yet?

Hope you are OK Eddie.

swanbourne
28th November 2006, 10:35
I spent all weekend writing my final response, which must be submitted by 13 December. Omega then has 30 days to make their final response before it goes for judgement. I understand they usually deliver judgement within 12 weeks so we should see a result by April 2007.

Eddie

PDR
28th November 2006, 11:03
I spent all weekend writing my final response, which must be submitted by 13 December. Omega then has 30 days to make their final response before it goes for judgement. I understand they usually deliver judgement within 12 weeks so we should see a result by April 2007.

Eddie

Thanks for that info. Lets all hope for a good outcome then... in the meantime don't let the situation get you down.

All the best,

Paul

Griswold
28th November 2006, 11:26
Fingers crossed that you beat the buggers Eddie. :) :)

Jim:
29th November 2006, 00:34
Good luck Eddie!

Whatever happens, you've fought your corner hard. Well done.

Jim