Ebay dealt blow on fake Rolexes by German court

[Yorkshire Vixen]

i can see what steven is saying

 

[Durham Fox]

i can see what steven is saying

Could you exlain it to me then because I cant....

 

[Yorkshire Vixen]

If they are being passed off as the genuine article obviously not, but in this case and numerous others the prices tells you that this is not the genuine article. If it is not being passed off as the original item, is it really counterfeit?

it seems pretty obvious to me without the need to explain

 

[Macky]

Could you exlain it to me then because I cant....

If somebody is selling a watch for a fiver then it's pretty much nailed on that it isn't a Rolex.
It is obviously a looky-likey at best & if you think you are getting a geniune Rolex for that money, could I interest you in some magic beans?

 

[homer]

If somebody is selling a watch for a fiver then it's pretty much nailed on that it isn't a Rolex.
It is obviously a looky-likey at best & if you think you are getting a geniune Rolex for that money, could I interest you in some magic beans?

How magic are they, I might be interested

 

[Steven]

Can't get my head round that logic.

You get a wagging finger

If something is merely "in the style of" something and not sold as being the genuine article then it cannot be counterfeit but merely something made to look like a more famous product.

In order for something to be counterfeit, the item must be made and sold with the purpose of deceiving the buyer into believing that the item was orginally made by the true producers of that item.

When you are in Bangkok and pay ten pounds for a "Rolex" you know it is not a Rolex and although it has Rolex stamped on the side you know it is a fake. Nobody is deceiving anyone about the item concerned. Now if I were to pay £3000 for the same watch then deception has occured and at that moment the item is a counterfeit.

Counterfeiting relies on copying the item and then an intention to defraud.

 

[Macky]

How magic are they, I might be interested

Too late, swwg just PM'd me.

 

[Yorkshire Vixen]

If somebody is selling a watch for a fiver then it's pretty much nailed on that it isn't a Rolex.
It is obviously a looky-likey at best & if you think you are getting a geniune Rolex for that money, could I interest you in some magic beans?

exactly not sure about the magic beans though

 

[Melton Fox]

Steven - Is counterfeiting a crime only upon completion of a transaction?

 

[homer]

If something is merely "in the style of" something and not sold as being the genuine article then it cannot be counterfeit but merely something made to look like a more famous product.

In order for something to be counterfeit, the item must be made and sold with the purpose of deceiving the buyer into believing that the item was orginally made by the true producers of that item.

When you are in Bangkok and pay ten pounds for a "Rolex" you know it is not a Rolex and although it has Rolex stamped on the side you know it is a fake. Nobody is deceiving anyone about the item concerned. Now if I were to pay £3000 for the same watch then deception has occured and at that moment the item is a counterfeit.

Counterfeiting relies on copying the item and then an intention to defraud.

Not the way that Trading Standards look at it

 

[Durham Fox]

Not the way that Trading Standards look at it

Quite.

 

[Steven]

Steven - Is counterfeiting a crime only upon completion of a transaction?

Where the intention is to deceive.

 

[Melton Fox]

Where the intention is to deceive.

OK, so it's down to a case of the ability of the prosecution to prove intent. Thank You :icon_wink

 

[Steven]

Not the way that Trading Standards look at it

To busy supporting Rolex's profits. :icon_roll

 

[drew]

So a company that makes a product is in the wrong because they make a profit?

Yet a company that makes a copy of that product to sell for a profit is ok? I'm sure they don't make them for fun.

 

[Durham Fox]

To busy supporting Rolex's profits. :icon_roll

Perhaps because they invented the watches in the first place and spent decades buidling up their brand based on quality, design and research :icon_roll

 

[homer]

To busy supporting Rolex's profits. :icon_roll

That's right Steven - that's their sole purpose in life :icon_roll

 

[Dour]

Perhaps because they invented the watches in the first place and spent decades buidling up their brand based on quality, design and research :icon_roll

Did Rolex really invent watches?

 

[Steven]

Perhaps because they invented the watches in the first place and spent decades buidling up their brand based on quality, design and research :icon_roll

All true but how does a five pound fake undermine that? Bear in mind Rolex deliberately make less watches than demand in order to create an artificial demand bubble.

A drug company patent typically lasts for twenty years and I feel no product should expect or have legal protection for any time longer than that. Anything else is artifically protecting the profits of a company against competition.

 

[Jeff]

All true but how does a five pound fake undermine that? Bear in mind Rolex deliberately make less watches than demand in order to create an artificial demand bubble.

A drug company patent typically lasts for twenty years and I feel no product should expect or have legal protection for any time longer than that. Anything else is artifically protecting the profits of a company against competition.

There's nothing to stop companies making similar watches to Rolex, but not identical copies, and without using the rolex name. If people want a Rolex they should buy one, if not, they should buy something else.