David vs Goliath

My wife forwarded me this article today about how a small company that makes children's clocks has incurred the wrath of the big green giant. Seriously, I don't see how someone could possibly confuse products produced by the two companies. But anyway, you be the judge...
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-64268369

I can see where that design could possibly confuse a 4 year old. But then again I don’t think any 4year olds will be Rolex shopping. LOL 🤦

And any Seafood restaurant also. Although I really doubt they would be confused with any “horological and chronometric instruments.”. But you never know, they are using the word “oyster”

This is absurd. Rolex is said to have 100% brand recognition. I wonder what percentage thinks of them when they hear “oyster”. Personally, I think of oysters. And I’m a watch nut. Those clocks are cool. I wonder if anybody considered maybe if children learn how to read an analog clock they would be more inclined to purchase a watch as an adult.

I mean, hard to argue, lol.

This might be good PR for them in the long run if Rolex relents tho.

Definitely turns me off and makes me rethink my desire for a Rolex on top of all the other issues with them. Big bully going after small business women trying to teach kids. They say no press is bad press but it’s not necessarily always true. I guess Rolex has legions of lawyers and this is common patent stuff and maybe it’s being overblown. But come on, kids clocks? 🤨

How ridiculous is it in the first place that you can trademark a species of wild life? I think I may trademark “shrimp” and litigate all shrimp purveyors out of business and corner the market.

I read this article a few days ago and it made me smh. I have read of many similar cases over the years where mega corporations go after little fish under similar pretenses. While some of those cases had a valid cause, most are simply dog-eat-dog strategies to eliminate competition.

The premise is to protect brand dominance and although sometimes the "threat" is laughable (as in here), the ultimate purpose is to set an example for future prospects who might consider profiting off brand impersonation, at the cost of any collateral damage. Even if the legal premise is unable to hold water, they know they can outspend the little guy and prevail by running them into the ground financially.

A textbook example of this business strategy is the story between Thomas Edison (General Electric) and Nikola Tesla. Tesla invented the superior electric system we know today and generally use, known as AC current. Edison was backed by JP Morgan, a major financial powerhouse who probably did not understand its investment in an inferior electric system. Tesla had the backing of Westinghouse who went for all-or-bust, investing its last dollar in a very promising inventor - Nikola Tesla. Knowing that their technology was much inferior to Tesla's, GE launched a smear campaign against Westinghouse. Later in a high-stakes bidding war for a major contract to build a hydroelectric plant for Niagara Falls, GE seemed lost. The strategy? Sue Westinghouse. JP Morgan outspent Westinghouse and ran him into the ground. Legally, JP Morgan did not stand a chance, since Westinghouse legitimately held Tesla's patents. However, Westinghouse was financially suffocated by the litigation and in order to survive, it signed over all of Tesla's patents to JP Morgan. To this day, we all depend on Tesla's AC current for electricity which was implemented under the name of General Electric. A very interesting story to read.

In this case, it seems Rolex is following that textbook but my opinion is that Rolex went too far. It is not innocent. Its executives have been fully briefed by its lawyers and they are surely writing a very large check to drown out this little company.

I doubt I will ever own a Rolex simply because I can't stand the snobbish stigma behind its brand. I came close to giving in for a couple of Oyster models I found attractive but when I read about their new business approach - where they now vet potential buyers to consider if they are worthy of owning their products, that did it for me. I will not wear a product from a brand that is this pretentious. I wonder how many will follow in my footsteps because of their decision to stomp out these ladies who all they are trying do do is offer a learning tool for children.

But ultimately, will Rolex feel the sting? I doubt it. There are too many people out there who will cut off an arm to wear that little crown on their other one. And I wouldn't be surprised that if Rolex bankrupts these ladies, it will shortly offer a children's clock...

Petition signed.

Those comments above were exactly what my wife said to me. She was already not a big fan of how Rolex did business and the brand's current image. I had put myself on the list for a blue dial OP36 late last year, but this episode and my wife's remarks have definitely made me think twice. "Why would someone want to be associated with a company that does crap like this?", she said. That's why she much prefers Omega. Better value for money and better brand image.