Nothing shady about it. Generally, when you request a specific ruling like that from a government agency, you have to pay a "user's fee" for the agency to do the necessary research and publish its opinion. Rolex likely did that many years ago. US Customs issued their decision (which would apply only to Rolex, since they requested it) and it then becomes the government's obligation to enforce the ruling. It also works the other way. A question could come from a government attorney involved in case regarding the interpretation of a statute and request a similar ruling. Regardless of who requests such a ruling, it is enforced by that agency until a newer ruling supersedes it, Congress changes the law, or it is struck down by a court. I see it all the time from the IRS in my tax consulting practice. Omega tried an end run around the "first sale" doctrine some years ago with mixed results. gatorcpa
I only meant shady in the nicest way. We lawyers never push the boundaries. And government never shows favorites. Regards, bill
Guys thanks for the information. I am not a lawyer but I do have extensive knowledge of legitimately cross border trading in authentic branded goods and can only tell you of my experiences. I am not saying the seizure of Rolexes at the us border has not or would not in future happen however I am saying in practice (unless you are gray trading large quantities of rolexes) you have an extremely strong case for having your watch released as an individual who was simply buying overseas - note the paragraph However, the relief provision located at 19 C.F.R. § 133.22(c)(4) explicitly provides that relief also exists pursuant to the exemption provided for in 19 C.F.R. § 148.55. The CBP regulations located at 19 C.F.R. § 148.55 provide for an exemption for a quantity of one genuine "Rolex" watch. However, with respect to genuine "Rolex" watches in a quantity in excess of one genuine "Rolex" watch accompanying an arriving traveler-importer, subsection § 148.55(c) would require the traveler-importer to present to CBP the written consent to the importation from the recordant. Such written consent from the recordant is required since no quantity in excess of one has been published in the Federal Register for genuine "Rolex" watches. 19 C.F.R. § 148.55(c). In practice Rolex and or Customs are not going to chase every person importing a vintage and probably not even every person buying a new current range Rolex at a cheaper price than they can buy at in the US ...although the odd person may get unlucky. In reality if an import is flagged by customs and Rolex are engaged it is likely only to be for a quantity purchase by a dealer and not an individual. Rolex will pick and choose their battles as to who they stamp down upon because their resources are limited and are clearly looking to aim their efforts at people importing more then one piece on regular basis and harming their authorized dealer market. Therefore should the worst happen and if the individual importer of a Rolex (or any other brand for that matter) from overseas has an issue they can if they so wish provide all the relevant documentation themselves to try and successfully release the product or alternatively they could choose to employ the services of a lawyer who can assist them in releasing the product by following the correct processes and going through the right channels...this is normally successful if you have a legitimate and reasonable case for importation but as Al says we are ALL learning every day and it is not always black and white there are as always several shades of grey in between, Regards Justin
Incidentally I may add Gatorcpa is entirely correct in that this issue comes down to the semantics of words like 'legitimately' purchased and 'counterfeit' and ultimately whoever has the deepest pockets to argue their case (normally the large brands) is the one whose definition wins out.
Rolex has nearly unlimited resources. Their cash and gold reserves rival nations. we aren't a bunch of crackpot scardy cats. If they catch you, they will take your watch. They're very broad about it.
Respectfully disagree here. If you spend a lot of time on VRF or other Rolex forums you'll see that Customs does in fact seek out and seize Rolex. Assuming they would not means assuming they A.) don't take their jobs seriously, and B.) have hugely sympathetic hearts toward watch collectors that override their desire to bust people, make seizures, and do well for themselves in their chosen career. If you believe either of those things I've got a bridge to sell you. In this context, they are law enforcement and in their eyes you're a law breaker. Simple. They seize the watch. In this day and age of rampant civil forfeiture when police seize money, cars, and houses from people without even pressing charges, I don't see how Customs enforcing an old import law hard to believe. BTW, this can theoretically even apply to bracelets sent overseas for repair, as they have the branded name and logo on them. A commonly suggested approach is to not label the item as Rolex, but as "steel watch band" or something. But for a whole watch this would never fly. Not new info.
When dealing with any government agency, as a practical matter, you are guilty until proven not guilty. Not legally correct, but it is what it is. Risk vs. Reward. gatorcpa
This does not just apply to dealers - it applies to everyone. I'm not sure why you keep trying to say otherwise. Unless you have hard evidence to the contrary, saying what is or isn't likely in your opinion is misleading to people. As others have noted, this is a well known issue and what you are saying is "not likely" has actually happened. Will they catch every package coming into the US? Well of course not, but please don't be under the impression that if they do find out it's a Rolex watch or branded product that they will just let it go. Real world experience by others proves this is not the case mate. Cheers, Al
Actually there are many cases where it is quite legal to be considered guilty until you prove yourself innocent. Civil forfeiture is very common in the US and is completely legal. It has been making the news a lot here in Canada lately as the US cops are specifically targeting out of country license plates...if you are for example driving in your car and get pulled over for a traffic stop with a large sum of cash, the police can take that cash by simply saying that your intent was to purchase drugs with that cash. It is up to you to prove that you were not using for that purpose. The police in the US rake in millions every year doing this sort of thing. They also file charges against the property - not you as a person. So they can claim that your house is guilty, and seize it. Not charging you, but your house, car, or a sum of money. Also in health and safety law it is very common that where an accident happens in a workplace, you as an employer are guilty of an offense automatically until you prove yourself innocent via "due diligence". I dealt with this law for decades in an industrial plant when I worked as a project engineer. I have seen supervisors who were not even at work at the time of an accident be charged with an offense and had to use due diligence as their defense. Cheers, Al
Bingo. Similar to what we're discussing here. The watch in these circumstances is considered contraband, no matter if it's genuine, what your intent was in sending it, or if you're the legal owner.
These are unfortunate examples of the way the US is heading. We now have the drug related seizures mentioned above, the Citzens Equity case expanding eminent domain ( some states actually acted to correct this miscarriage, )and customs doing seizures. It used to be there was some burden on law enforcement to act. That is being whittled away by complicit courts and complacent politicians. The burden is on the citizen, quite a turn around from the principles on which we were founded. No wonder IP litigation is called the Sport of Kings. Bill
As I said above, The Golden Rule has reigned in the US since July 5th, 1776. He who has the gold makes the rules, Rolex has lots and lots of gold and the government has lots and lots of lawyers. Doesn't make it right, but it does make it legal. gatorcpa