or instead Rolex is looking to take over the TM exclusively.
...?
This is something I find wrong with the American TM system, allowing generic names or nicknames widely used to be trademarked. If someone were savvy they would trademarking the colloquial terms and nicknames used for watches - Big Eye, Hulk, Speedy, Two Tone, Buckley, California Dial, Pie Pan, Sword Hands, Alpha Hands, etc, etc. I don't know if any of these have been trademarked but, hey, here in America, the system lets you do it. So, why not?
We had a similar situation here in Baltimore. The owner of Cafe Hon, a kitchy diner playing on all things John Waters (Hairspray- not the porn stuff), copywrited “Hon” in use on anything printed. “Hon” is a colloquialism for “Honey” which has been part of the local dialect for at least half a millennia. The backlash against her was insane and all but drove her out of business.
Drove her even to “Kitchen Nighmares” and Gordon Ramsey if I remember correctly!
You mean like maybe they want to finally bring out a new line of decent shaped sized and proportioned sub’s...the ‘new Rolex milsub’ line of watches...
I guess ‘decent shaped and sized’ is relative to the wearer 😗
Kawhi Leonard‘S pictured ( for iPhone in his other hand)
It’s still not 100% clear to me if Rolex is looking simply to cancel Kiger’s TM (so anyone, including Rolex, could use the term in marketing), or instead Rolex is looking to take over the TM exclusively.
And what I mean by the above is not merely what Rolex’s filings say on their face, but instead whether there is a deeper strategy in these TM cases that isn’t appreciable on the face of the filings: e.g., perhaps it’s regarded as good tactics to start by claiming “it’s mine,” to draw out a response of “it can’t be yours, everyone uses it,” before going in for the kill of “if everyone uses it, then it seems YOU can’t have the TM.”
The article appears to note that Kiger’s response (“everyone uses it”) could instead result in the TM being found too general to maintain the TM.
So here again, assuming Rolex has pretty good IP counsel, it would be great to understand the deeper strategy vs the on-paper claims.
not exactly... you have to use it, and it can’t be something already common... ie you can’t trademark Soda Pop. My guess is that Rolex wants to remove his sole claim to its use and will argue it’s a pretty existing generic term that should not be trademarked.
Also @Tom Dick did you read the article?
Rolex could just buy the trademark from Kiger but large companies generally go the bully route.
Yes, though more discussed in the military watch community, and it has been quite nasty over the years.
One in the US (the nasty one who has trademarked it on all sorts of things, and gets people's adverts taken down),
Rolex could just buy the trademark from Kiger but large companies generally go the bully route.
I'm not convinced this is really about a new watch model. If the Rolex is only seeking a TM in the US, it doesn't make sense that this is for a new model. They would be seeking TM all over the world if that were the case.
interesting. Apparently no longer the case in the US at least - as it lapsed in 2017 according to reports. and if anyone ever applied in the US again, I bet people are now monitoring to file protest.
NATO is still TM'd in the US. The fourth of four disputes is still underway: https://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92067341&pty=CAN&eno=49
I believe it doesn't expire until 2024 or thereabouts.
