Omega has filed a response

[swanbourne]

Follow this link and read documents 40 & 41.

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91158655&pty=OPP

I love this bit:

Applicant also challenges a series of statements asserted by Opposer in Opposer's Trial Brief. None of these challenges, even if true, are supported by any admissible evidence, and therefore, none of these challenges present disputed issues for resolution by the Board. They, therefore, do not warrant a response.

So it doesn't matter that you caught them out lying, they don't have to respond. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Eddie

[endure]

What's the 'Oral Hearing Application' for Eddie? Are they trying to force you to go to the US?

[swanbourne]

What's the 'Oral Hearing Application' for Eddie? Are they trying to force you to go to the US?

It looks that way Richard.

Eddie

[Gert]

:roll: If you have to go state-side don't accept any orange jump suits, even if they offer them as a welcome present :wink:

Best of luck with those self-important thugs,

Gert

[Fschwep]

I like the bit where they state that the use of the 'Broadarrow' mark to depict British Government property for hundreds of years is irrelevant because it was not used in the US (of course anything happening anywhere else in the world is irrelevant). And that there is no evidence to support it. Maybe you should let the Queen testify. And they seem to have forgotten that they were a British colony probably during times when that arrow symbol was used. So it may not have been in use in the USA, but maybe it *was* used in *America*.. ..

Does Omega realize that they are spending a lot more on this law firm than they would ever have lost in business to you if they had simply done nothing and allowed you to sell a handful of Broadarrow watches from your home, while enthusing about the virtues of new and classic Omegas in the TZ-UK forum instead of generating this kind of negative publicity? I suppose it was the lawyer's idea to oppose your application?

[Ron Jr]

If you come to NY let me know.

[JohnF]

Hi -

Eddie, I always knew that you offered quality products at a great price.

Omega has explicitly acknowledged that you offer equivalent products. :-)

Given the problems of the coaxial movements, I'd even venture to say that your return rate is signifcantly smaller. :-)

And it's amazing that they simply state "We Have Priority".

Silly gits.

Best of luck!

JohnF

[mrteatime]

Jus to add my two bob...A while ago (2001) Gibson guitars filed agaisnt a smaller guitar maker for making a guitar "similar" in shape and design and cost (PRS guitars) They stopped PRS making them for about 18months whilst it went through the courts. Eventually PRS won the right to produce there guitars. Gibson also used the same tactict that the customers that bought there products were stupid because thay could not tell the difference between a gibson les paul and a PRS singlecut (the name of the guitar) It was VERY obvious to anyone buying one what was what, as you either want a gibson or a prs, as they are very different looking and sounding instuments. The courts ruling stated that if someone had £2000 to buy a guitar, thay wouldn't be "confused" which one was witch as guitar players have very "set" idea's" about what they want.

Im pretty sure that its the same with buying a watch. I know that if i had two grand to buy a watch i wouldn't get confused and buy a braodarrow INSTEAD of an omega (will i would now). And even if i did go into town, i couldn't buy a broadarrow as they aren't available to buy in the same places as the omegas'. The same can be said about buying an omega on the web....I have lost count of the amount of times i've been told by certain shops that you CAN'T buy an omega on line because its "more than likely going to be a fake" and "omega dont sell on the web"

This sort of sh*t really gets on my goat, you can only have it one way, but these tw*ts want it both. Anyway, i really hope that you win this and i have a MASSIVE amount of respect for you in not rolling over and allowing them to bully you in the first place, as im sure that it would have been the easiest and cheapest option.

If all else fails...you can always send them round and i'll be more then happy to have a "chat" with them about it (as im sure a few others would)

Good luck mate, best wishes...

shawn

[mrteatime]

here is a link to the case http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgur ... f%26sa%3DN

and heres the les paul http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o93/ ... aul-58.jpg

and heres the prs http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o93/ ... glecut.jpg

shawn

[mrteatime]

here is a link to the case http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgur ... f%26sa%3DN

and heres the les paul http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o93/ ... aul-58.jpg

and heres the prs http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o93/ ... glecut.jpg

shawn

sorry forgot to mention that PRS won on appeal

[johnbaz]

why the heck is this thread 5 miles wide???? :D :D :D



j o h n .

[Ming Thein]

Follow this link and read documents 40 & 41.

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91158655&pty=OPP

I love this bit:

Applicant also challenges a series of statements asserted by Opposer in Opposer's Trial Brief. None of these challenges, even if true, are supported by any admissible evidence, and therefore, none of these challenges present disputed issues for resolution by the Board. They, therefore, do not warrant a response.

So it doesn't matter that you caught them out lying, they don't have to respond. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Eddie

I swear it's the arrogance of a big corporation. Seem to see it everywhere. It basically says 'fuck you, because we can.'

Good luck Eddie.

Ming

[ticktock]

Time to cut the losses and put it all behind you. Easier said than done though I am sure.