closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: What are your thoughts on this trademark infringement?

  1. #1
    Master Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    9,580

    What are your thoughts on this trademark infringement?

    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

  2. #2
    Grand Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    11,651
    Blog Entries
    21
    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

  3. #3
    Master Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    9,580
    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.

  4. #4
    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.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by MartynJC (UK) View Post
    Why not go after this trademark too? https://www.trademarkelite.com/uk/tr...1519500/OYSTER

    Because they're not making clocks.

  6. #6
    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.

  7. #7
    Craftsman williemays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Dubuque
    Posts
    747
    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?

  8. #8
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    14,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Danstone View Post
    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.
    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.

  9. #9
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    London, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,238
    Rolex. 40% marketing. 40% lawyers. 20% horology!


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by williemays View Post
    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?
    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.

  11. #11
    Oyster & Pop sounds like a cheap food deal at a dodgy beach side eatery.

  12. #12
    Master Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    9,580
    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".

  13. #13
    Craftsman williemays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Dubuque
    Posts
    747
    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.

  14. #14
    Master JPE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,193
    It's almost as stupid as if Porsche sued this manufacturer for making copies of their cars.


  15. #15
    Master Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    9,580
    As someone said earlier, at least it's free publicity...

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...6CZdaI-02_oV2k

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by JPE View Post
    It's almost as stupid as if Porsche sued this manufacturer for making copies of their cars.

    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.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisparker View Post
    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.
    Isn't the designer paid by Porsche (in this case) to design the car and the design belongs to them?

  18. #18
    Master M1011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,685
    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.

  19. #19
    Master gregory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Riding the railroad like a hobo.....
    Posts
    2,832
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by M1011 View Post
    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.

  20. #20
    Grand Master Neil.C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    SE England
    Posts
    26,313
    Quote Originally Posted by M1011 View Post
    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.
    Agreed.
    Cheers,
    Neil.

    My Speedmaster website:

    http://www.freewebs.com/neil271052

  21. #21

  22. #22
    Grand Master snowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    13,793
    Quote Originally Posted by Yunsung View Post
    Rolex. 40% marketing. 40% lawyers. 20% horology!


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
    Generous...

    M

    Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk
    Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?

  23. #23
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    SW, UK
    Posts
    183
    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.

  24. #24
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    M62 corridor
    Posts
    4,288
    Quote Originally Posted by hughtrimble View Post
    Oyster & Pop sounds like a cheap food deal at a dodgy beach side eatery.
    I’m not their target market but it’s an awful name.

  25. #25
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    M62 corridor
    Posts
    4,288
    Quote Originally Posted by JPE View Post
    It's almost as stupid as if Porsche sued this manufacturer for making copies of their cars.
    Why should someone profit from copying someone else’s design? They sell because they are a “copy” of a Porsche design.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information