As I wrote, Rolex acts against counterfeits based on their brand logo, nothing else. And while we're at it, the design of the submariner was once taken from Blancpain's FiftyFathoms.I don't know if Rolex per se has a copyright on their design. But logically, they must have, otherwise it wouldn't be possible to do something against replicas.
I have a new signature: Tucker...wallowing in his "pit of ignorance."
Sent from my iPhone using RWI
And it was so important to put who wrote that sentence and what his occupation is, right? I don't understand your problem, especially with that "19 Year-Old Law Student and Race Car Driver". Fact is, you insisted that it is a homage, without even bothering reading all my arguments or discussing. But at least get it right, I am not a Race Car driver, but a normal test driver. And don't forget to edit my age every year.I have a new signature: Tucker...wallowing in his "pit of ignorance."
Sent from my iPhone using RWI
Well I don't know where you have the information that Rolex acts only based on their logo. However, if the SBB and Mondaine were capable of copyrighting their watch with the mentioned "3 dimensional brand and design copyright", I am pretty sure that Rolex, AP and the other big brands have done that too. Nevertheless, your linked article was very interesting. Looks like that just 2 days ago a new tribute to the Fifty Fathoms was announced: http://www.blancpain.com/en/news/tribute-fifty-fathoms-mil-spec-only-watch-unique-pieceAs I wrote, Rolex acts against counterfeits based on their brand logo, nothing else. And while we're at it, the design of the submariner was once taken from Blancpain's FiftyFathoms.
Here's a read, if you're inclined: https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/a-historical-look-at-the-blancpain-fifty-fathoms-live-photos
Now you're just being mean.And it was so important to put who wrote that sentence and what his occupation is, right? I don't understand your problem, especially with that "19 Year-Old Law Student and Race Car Driver". Fact is, you insisted that it is a homage, without even bothering reading all my arguments or discussing. But at least get it right, I am not a Race Car driver, but a normal test driver. And don't forget to edit my age every year.
I can't see anything mean in my text - but feel free to explain, maybe me might finally find a topic both can discussNow you're just being mean.
[emoji15] [emoji15] [emoji15]I will destroy the thread with this one:
View attachment 31674
Just a quick one here as I'm off - but a few points.
Swiss law has no application outside Switzerland. (Not part of EU)
The EU has laws on labelling country of origin, though it is much harder to apply those laws to a mechanical object - with a global supply chain on components, than it is to a apply to a piece of fruit. Swatch make a lot of stuff in China, though they would be allowed to claim their movements are 'Swiss'.
The design of a watch CANNOT be copyrighted - no it can't. Essentially it's a round or rectangular object which tells the time. There are mechanisms which can be regarded as unique and therefore patented, gas escape valve for example, but there are no legal impediments to making a direct copy (Ginault) or being heavily inspired by (Squale, Steinhart, and so on and on and on...)
I've read, incorrectly, that much of that is due to expired Rolex patents, but that's just not true. Take the Sub and let's look at what Rolex can't claim copyright on; round indexes (not unique) round face (not unique), Mercedes hands (not unique, and Mercedes may want a word about that if they could) 5 pointed crown (other brand marks, and crowns with 5 points), case shape (can't copyright a shape). So, that's the entire watch, apart from the movement, but that's another story and has its own limitations.
3D design copyright as mentioned above, I'm not so sure - I would say either the boat sailed on that one long ago, or it is not possible to say that something (now, or even recently) is unique enough to award protections to. The Apple case is unique, and by no means a benchmark or precedent. At that time they were in massive litigation with Samsung, and the last thing Apple wanted was to be shit talked in the press about ripping other people designs off, when at all costs they needed to be seen as the victim who had their ideas stolen, and that all they want to do is 'allow us to communicate with friends and family in new and exiting ways we never thought possible' (that Chiat Day copywriter makes me want to puke). It would have been cheaper to fight it, or push out a software update - but that's not what Apple wanted.
Comment above on the Sinn vs Breitling Navitimer - no. The Sinn version is not a homage, it's the real deal. When Breitling when bust in the late 70's the factory was broken up and sold off, and Sinn acquired the rights to a couple of Navitimer models, as well as a bunch of machines and parts. They still have the rights to use it, and some complication on movement supply which I cannot remember led them to use the same 7750 movement that Breitling use. Sinn also made it properly water resistant.
That didn't end up being quick, now I will be late.
Lets keep it to worst fakes pics please...
Sent from my iPhone using RWI
Good god man, that is the worst I have ever seen. Good work, sir, hahaI will destroy the thread with this one:
View attachment 31674
Lets keep it to worst fakes pics please...
Sent from my iPhone using RWI
I spoke too soon with my last post of the yachty being the worst I'd seen...I honestly don't think that it could EVER get any worse than this hahahahaLOL :applause:
Dear muiramas, where did you get that info, that Swiss law is not accepted outside its country? We are not part of the EU (thank god), but we have a lot of bilateral contracts. And because the intellectual property often is a backbone of a company, Switzerland accepts international design patents and the Swiss patents are accepted internationally. It's that easy. Do you think, just because we're not part of the EU, our laws aren't oriented internationally and vice versa? Internationally oriented law and contracts are essential to free markets, imports / exports etc.Just a quick one here as I'm off - but a few points.
Swiss law has no application outside Switzerland. (Not part of EU)
The EU has laws on labelling country of origin, though it is much harder to apply those laws to a mechanical object - with a global supply chain on components, than it is to a apply to a piece of fruit. Swatch make a lot of stuff in China, though they would be allowed to claim their movements are 'Swiss'.
The design of a watch CANNOT be copyrighted - no it can't. Essentially it's a round or rectangular object which tells the time. There are mechanisms which can be regarded as unique and therefore patented, gas escape valve for example, but there are no legal impediments to making a direct copy (Ginault) or being heavily inspired by (Squale, Steinhart, and so on and on and on...)
I've read, incorrectly, that much of that is due to expired Rolex patents, but that's just not true. Take the Sub and let's look at what Rolex can't claim copyright on; round indexes (not unique) round face (not unique), Mercedes hands (not unique, and Mercedes may want a word about that if they could) 5 pointed crown (other brand marks, and crowns with 5 points), case shape (can't copyright a shape). So, that's the entire watch, apart from the movement, but that's another story and has its own limitations.
3D design copyright as mentioned above, I'm not so sure - I would say either the boat sailed on that one long ago, or it is not possible to say that something (now, or even recently) is unique enough to award protections to. The Apple case is unique, and by no means a benchmark or precedent. At that time they were in massive litigation with Samsung, and the last thing Apple wanted was to be shit talked in the press about ripping other people designs off, when at all costs they needed to be seen as the victim who had their ideas stolen, and that all they want to do is 'allow us to communicate with friends and family in new and exiting ways we never thought possible' (that Chiat Day copywriter makes me want to puke). It would have been cheaper to fight it, or push out a software update - but that's not what Apple wanted.
Comment above on the Sinn vs Breitling Navitimer - no. The Sinn version is not a homage, it's the real deal. When Breitling when bust in the late 70's the factory was broken up and sold off, and Sinn acquired the rights to a couple of Navitimer models, as well as a bunch of machines and parts. They still have the rights to use it, and some complication on movement supply which I cannot remember led them to use the same 7750 movement that Breitling use. Sinn also made it properly water resistant.
That didn't end up being quick, now I will be late.