Reply With QuoteVery annoying as this can blur brand recognition and confuse people searching for your originals on the internet.
Would you legally be able to prevent them using the names Eddie?
It takes a bit of research to come up with a model name and ensure you're not treading on anyone's toes but not everyone does it. I launched the Smiths Vanguard in May this year and this week, I became aware that someone else was planning to use it.
I launched in May 2019 and in July 2019, NTH watches announced they would be launching the NTH Vanguard later this year. The announcement included a video showing renderings of the new watch, the fact that only renderings were shown suggest that this is still in the development stage and nothing has yet been made.
I contacted Chris Vail, the owner of NTH on 2 July 2019 pointing out that I already launched a "Vanguard" earlier this year and he responded
andWe've had that name in the works for some time. I wasn't aware you were using it.
So on 2 July he gives me his word that he didn't know, yet on 27 June 2019 he "liked" a post on Facebook which specifically mentioned the Smiths Vanguard.I give you my word, I wasn't aware that you were making a model called the Vanguard.
As only renders have been produced so far, I suggested he migh consider changing the name of his new watch, he said
Now the next one.We're not changing it. Sorry.
I launched the Precista Aerotimer in January 2019 and I've just discovered another company is planning to launch an "Aerotimer", you may recall that the name came from a suggestion by foum member Seikopath in October 2018 - https://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.p...ight=aerotimer
Now, a New Zealand startup has decided to call their new watch "Aerotimer". I've contacted them but haven't received a reply so far.
https://beaufort-watches.com/watches...PnYuN42y58HjdU
A simple Google search would avoid these conflicts but it appears that people don't care.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
Very annoying as this can blur brand recognition and confuse people searching for your originals on the internet.
Would you legally be able to prevent them using the names Eddie?
Unlike Chris Vail to be inconsiderate
We must be getting to the stage now where most names are already in use. Franck Muller have had a Vanguard model for around three or four years.
I agree, but I hardly think that the Franck Muller falls within the budget of most on here, different target markets. If you're going to buy a Frank Muller you're not going to buy mine and vice versa but the two watches mentioned above are both aiming at the same market as I am.Originally Posted by Danstone
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
No, as Vanguard is a dictionary word. It's like a bakery trying to copyright the word bread for example.
- - - Updated - - -
Aerotimer has also been used before, back in 1999, a specially designed watch for Lufthansa pilots.
I own a Franck Muller and also two of your excellent pieces and can appreciate quality whatever the price point. I think that you have built up such a reputation that lesser brands using the same model name, even in the same price range, shouldn’t have an impact on your sales.
You can register trademarks and styles of nomenclature. I believe Peugeot had exclusive rights (in the car industry) for all 3 digit numbers with a zero in the middle so they no other car makers could name a car like 405, 306, 205 etc. As with Porsche have rights to '911'.
But with every trademark comes a cost, first to register it, then to fight it when someone else uses it. And the cost and hassle is rarely worth it for small businesses.
'Tank' is also a dictionary word, but Cartier have copyrighted it and vigourously sue anyone using the word in connection with a watch. If you list a rectangular watch on Ebay which is not a Cartier and call it a 'tank', the listing will be removed.
Perhaps too much to ask that people might do the decent thing these days, dog eat dog world it seems.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
When I google Vanguard, I get the Gruppo Gamma Vanguard watch, released in 2014 at a price of $850.
Although annoying there's nothing you can do about it unless you copyright the word.
Isn’t Chris Vail the bloke involved with the recent Ginault controversy?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eddie,
Happy to put you in touch with a colleague who handles trade marks and names within our manufacuring business in Sheffield. Am sure she would give you some free and honest advice
BR
Ian
Some say 'imitation is the sincerest form of flattery' although i'm sure it never feels that way. Very dishonest response from that guy. Imo.
His name seems to have been used, I'm not sure anything points to him being involved.
As someone who works with brands and trademarks all the time this is 100% incorrect.
I didn't register the names so I have no grounds to fight, I just thought people might do the decent thing. How naïve am I.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
This sort of thing is very, very annoying, frustrating, worrying, and upsetting, isn't it.
In my own case, I've traded under the name 'Signal100' for many years (over a decade now). In particular, I've been working on online collaboration software for much of that time but (I must admit) have not released anything to the public as yet. Nevertheless, and to my great annoyance, the Open Whisper Systems protocol was renamed to the 'Signal' protocol in 2018[1]. This could potentially become a problem one day because Signal's (their) encrypted messaging protocol has some potential conceptual crossover into the online collaboration tools space in which my Signal100 is being developed. My Signal100 will not be passing itself off as Signal, and Signal is not passing itself off as Signal100, but the risk remains that someone somewhere will become confused should by service eventually go live.
I can well understand that they liked the name 'Signal' for their protocol and product and that it is more succinct than 'Open Whisper' but it nevertheless grates that our respective product areas could be worryingly similar. In fact, instant messaging would likely be a part of Signal100's product/service offering in due course and what is now the Signal protocol would be an ideal protocol choice, but how do I now do that without it appearing as if I am trying to pass off my entire product/service range as Signal's. The fact that my Signal100 pre-dates what us now called Signal by about a decade isn't likely to help.
Having said all that, I do not think that you need to worry about Vanguard or Aerowatch in these two particular cases. Watch names have often been reused over the ages and confusion does not seem to be an issue, as far as I have seen. Chris Vail's seeming untruth is upsetting but one could perhaps charitably put that down to forgetfulness or not paying proper attention. Neither the NTH Vanguard nor the Beaufort Aerotimer resemble your Smiths Vanguard or Precista Aerotimer. I do not think that consumers will be unnecessarily confused.
The timing is upsetting, for sure, but it's not a killer. Your watches stand on their own merits and I honestly do not believe that your sales or your brand names will be negatively impacted by dissimilar watches with seemingly similar names.
Personally, I actually find Zeno's apparent use of your 'PRS' identifiers to be more annoying.
Footnote:-
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Messenger
In the old days it would have been more of an issue. Now, with a little SEO you can probably benefit fromit
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Even without registered trade names, I reckon you might still have legal grounds to fight.
BUT... I also think (as per my message above) that it would be throwing good money after bad. I do not think that the other two watches or their names will negatively impact your brand images or sales at all.
People get attached to names. Finding a good product, brand, or company name is really, really difficult. It always has been, of course, but with worldwide visibility on the Internet I think it's even worse nowadays. Finding a company or brand name that has a relevant Internet domain that has not already been taken is torture.
I wouldn't exactly say "forgive them" but I think ignoring them is fine in these two cases. The actual products really are dissimilar enough to not cause consumer confusion (imvho).
Last edited by markrlondon; 4th July 2019 at 13:52.
Hah, good point!
You can't copyright the word tank. You can however, like in Cartier's position, argue the case that using the word in relation to a watch could be seen as "passing off". In relation to watches Cartier can TM the word tank for their watches. So, they would sue as TM infringement.
- - - Updated - - -
Which in the UK you can't
Last edited by nunya; 4th July 2019 at 13:37.
It would appear that Frank Muller have the Vanguard trademark registered in Class 14 (watches and jewellery).Trade mark number EU012433488. Aerotimer is not registered nor has it ever been it would seem.
Some posters are confusing copyright and trademark which are not at all the same thing. Trademark is what it says - a mark (name) adopted or used for "trade". There are a wide variety of classes that names can be classified within - some quite broad categories and some quite narrow. The trademark class for watches is 14. The holder of an EU trademark in this category has the right to use this name for products within that category and can (in most cases) stop another manufacturer using the name for another product in the category. I have unfortunately been involved in quite a lot of these disputes.
Land Rover's Discovery was planned to be called Highlander until very close to launch in 1993 but Volvo Commercial Vehicles owned the rights to the name for a truck which is in the same class as cars and would not agree to releasing it or allowing another registration - hence a late stage name change.
There was an old case where Granada television tried to stop Ford using "Granada" for their new model car. I recall Ford arguing that Granada was a province in Spain and whilst I can't remember whether that argument was accepted, it's clear that Granada television's objection failed.
One thing I'm not too clear on is regarding the use of model names. I had 3 different names in the hat for the Smiths; Vanguard, Vanquish and Victor. Prior to that I tried to register "Le Mans" but got short shrift from representatives of Automobile Club de l'Ouest.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
We had an example in business law classes too many years ago of Lotus. 3 companies had it as their company name TM.
Lotus cars
Lotus Software
Lotus shoes
It was deemed that as none of the businesses are in the same industry, they could all use it as there could not be a reasonable case of one company or company product trying to "pass off" as another.
It's all about classes and continual usage.
Granada TV would not have had any case to register the Trademark in the motor-vehicles/road transport category - they simply don't make anything in that class and you can't register all of the classes unless you can prove you use the TM in that class. This is one of the reasons brands like Rolex and Breitling make promotional items such as coats or hats and umbrellas - they can register in those categories and show they produce those items (even if not for retail). Many businesses also license their name for use in other categories which is certainly the case with the ACO who make a considerable amount of money from licensing and make virtually nothing themselves (the cost per car for a Le Mans edition was well over £1000 each for naming rights last time I was involved in a project).
It's very likely that Aston Martin will have Vanquish registered for watches and can probably produce an example of a watch that was in some way branded Vanquish to go along with the model (there was a JLC that had a transponder in if I recall). This whole area is a huge minefield for brands - coming up with new and unique names and protecting names that are registered can be hugely costly and time consuming. Aston Martin had a protracted battle with a bike manufacturer who literally used every model name on a range of bikes - Virage, Vanquish, Vantage etc, and by the time it was resolved they'd sold them all and then said "oh in response to your cease and desist, we won't make any more".
Indeed. People just don't care anymore unfortunately.
When it comes to trademarks and brand names I'm not sure that it was ever any different. Well maybe in Victorian times but in the modern era since 1946 when US trademarks were revised and it became a serious legal business and worth millions to corporations it has been dog-eat-dog. Yes, there have been gentleman's agreements sometimes (Ford granting rights to their Continental TM to Bentley for instance), but anything that protects a business asset and has a legal recourse is going to be hard for most businesses to be "gentlemanly" about. And as for unprotected names, the first thing I would recommend to anyone using one is protect
it with a trademark registration.
There was also a Davosa Vangaurd launched in 2013 at a similar price point.
I wouldn't worry about it, unless there is similarities in design which there is not then I don't think anyone else will be confused or care.
I think the two most likely claims would be trademark infringement (but it isn’t a registered trademark for Eddie) or a claim for passing off.
I think the latter would be more likely if the design of the watch was similar.
I’m not an IP lawyer though.
Last edited by Berty234; 4th July 2019 at 18:07.
Wasn’t there a big spat when Apple computer started getting into music with iPod etc with the record label of the same name?
The main point I was making is that 6 months after I launch the Aerotimer, another company launches an Aerotimer.
Two months after I launch the Vanguard, NTH announces it's going to launch a Vanguard.
I don't think either is a coincidence.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
I’d imagine few of us would consider it a coincidence Eddie. But in the same way that Starbucks search for locations close to existing coffee shops (because the work has already been done to seed the market) your competition is looking at your naming strategy, liking the work you’ve done and, knowing there’s no legal comeback simply using the same idea you e already launched. It’s unoriginal and certainly not going to make them friends but they, like many other business people, simply don’t care unless there’s something you can do to stop them. Which sadly you can’t.
Someone still hurting....
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
Who is that guy, or just some random?
I don’t want to be a jerk mate but both names are very much on the nose for this type of product. A military term and a portmanteau of two of the most popular terms in the game? It was bound to happen eventually.
It shouldn’t hurt you too much though, I don’t know if you can get your google analytics but I’d bet a pound to a plum that no one is searching for your watches by model name without the brand.
If it were me, I’d try to let it wash over me completely. Bigger fish to fry and all that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's annoying and frustrating.
But, coincidence or not, I feel certain it won't harm you. Your watches and their watches are sufficiently different such that wouldbe buyers of your watches will not find themselves buying their watches rather than yours.
And, as Saint-Just said, the right SEO might gain some traffic from people searching for certain terms.
I must admit that I have no personal experience of Google Adwords but I do know that this is also a classic scenario where one may use Adwords to drive traffic to one's own site from 'similar' searches.
Ah yes, I should worry about a watch group that's had 32 posts in 30 days ;-)
Eddie
Someone still hurting....
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
Thought he was on a self imposed exile.Someone still hurting....
Nope, properly banned for his dual/triple/however many identities (Burnsey, sarky, ...?). I never figured which and how many.
He obviously managed to retain at least one login as he regularly comments about BP threads either on Facebook or on the GGB forum.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
[QUOTE=nunya;5141070]No, as Vanguard is a dictionary word. It's like a bakery trying to copyright the word bread for example.
Call it a Daytona or Submariner then. Sorted!
I was going to mention this too - i.e. that it is used by Gruppo Gamma already.
Hell you should just steal other people's names, like, I dunno, broadarrow
...
BUBI 0_0
The Vanguard has been in development since 2010, the Gruppo Gammas was released 4 years after that. Check the timestamps on the posts.
https://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.p...-it-all-starts
Vanguard was also mooted for another model back in 2007, post 61.
https://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.p...ght=pathfinder
Maybe this forum is where others find their inspiration?
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
But surely Eddie, you’re also at risk when vanguard is a registered trademark owned by another watch brand? Regardless of when you started development and what’s subsequently happened with other brands using the name you are using a name “owned” by someone else who could, conceivably, stop you producing any more and force you to destroy stock you hold. I was involved in a watch project in 2005 where 100 watches were seized and destroyed in a similarly trademark ruling.
But Eddie could only get his hands on 100 movements so they'll all be well sold - and they'll have to prize mine "out of my cold dead hands"
Posting Permissions
