Reply With Quote
Why not go after this trademark too? https://www.trademarkelite.com/uk/tr...1519500/OYSTER
Saw this on a watch Facebook page. Seems a bit mean of Rolex, but I guess the small business doesn't stand a chance if Oyster is trademarked against timepieces.
I'm assuming they could still use the name for the company, but they'd have to remove the brand name from the clocks only.
https://www.change.org/p/help-stop-r...redirect=false
Why not go after this trademark too? https://www.trademarkelite.com/uk/tr...1519500/OYSTER
“ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG
I think it’s because they have it for a different class of goods/services. It’s because these ladies used Oyster (& Pop) for a clock
I there was a chap on here with a similar problem with Sandbanks clothing.
Seems really petty by Rolex but I guess they see in black and white and don’t like anyone getting away with it.
Last edited by Christian; 18th January 2023 at 22:51.
Completely over the top reaction and there is clearly no risk of confusion. Bully boy tactics but not surprising.
I bet a fair few click the link and get angry at Rolex being described as a “manufacturer and marketer of dress watches” though.
Because they're not making clocks.Originally Posted by MartynJC (UK)
It's pathetic that Rolex would react in this way. What is the likelihood of Rolex customers becoming confused between the two companies?
Mind you, Rolex doing this has given the Oyster & Pop company a great bit of inadvertent advertising!
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Can you lose a trademark by not defending it against infringement? If Rolex wants to keep the rights to Oyster, they may not have a choice about ignoring this?
I disagree; it’s a case of where to draw the line.
Far better to have a zero tolerance than to create the need to judge each individual case on its merits.
Rolex. 40% marketing. 40% lawyers. 20% horology!
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Kind of. Brand names can be come generic, such as Aspirin and Sellotape or Nato Strap, if they don't protect their names they become a generic and well used term for product type which will be used by other brands, and become much more difficult to protect at a later date.
Oyster & Pop sounds like a cheap food deal at a dodgy beach side eatery.
I also read the other day that Levi's have to produce 10% of their Jeans with a red tab and no Levis lettering on it just to protect the trademark of the red tab itself.
I agree that Rolex probably have zero tolerance to ensure any problems don't get bigger. Seems a little unfair/mean though for a very small company that in no way could get mistaken for Rolex. I wonder if a well supported petition will make any difference to their cause. You probably get blackballed from the "expression of interest" list when Rolex study it though! Image that after "building your relationship".
Instead of a petition, I wonder if a better approach might be to use the publicity to find investors to finance the rebranding and to secure their own trademarks? It seems like they are making this an issue by continuing to infringe on the Oyster trademark.
If Rolex said sure, use Oyster for your clocks, could not another clock company come along and do the same? That would probably be more detrimental to this start up than rebranding now.
It's almost as stupid as if Porsche sued this manufacturer for making copies of their cars.
As someone said earlier, at least it's free publicity...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...6CZdaI-02_oV2k
I don’t think that’s stupid. If I’d designed that car I’d want my cut of the profit too. As a designer it’s not right that other companies can profit from your work, without giving a cut. If that toy car didn’t look like a Porsche sales wouldn’t be as strong, so there’s clearly a value to the design and brand, it’s why licensing agreements exist.It's almost as stupid as if Porsche sued this manufacturer for making copies of their cars.
Isn't the designer paid by Porsche (in this case) to design the car and the design belongs to them?
Sorry but if they choose to put 'Oyster' on a clock, you've got to expect this. Naivety doesn't get them a pass. Of course Rolex isn't going to accommodate someone using that on a clock... all good and well saying its for a £15 kids clock, but once they have the trademark what stops them broadening the product range?
No patience for this victim mentality. Even the title of the petition... "small women-owned, family business"... what precisely does any of that have to do with whether they are in the right or wrong? Nothing at all.
The 'woman-owned' part is annoying.
When you seek equality, don't put up the owner's gender to make them sound more valid and vulnerable.
You are in business.
What you are is irrelevant, if we are to be in an equal society where women shout from the rooftops about equality.
Agreed.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nocent-pun.htm
Small potatoes
Generous...
M
Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk
Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?
There was a reference to the case here:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUktnk5QJqg from a KC/Barrister.
Seems there would be a legal argument to continue using the name but like a lot of law....it depends on the final judgement more than anything else.
I’m not their target market but it’s an awful name.
Why should someone profit from copying someone else’s design? They sell because they are a “copy” of a Porsche design.
Posting Permissions
