August 10,2018:

Forbes magazine ranked Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. 64th on its 2016 list of the world's most powerful global brands. Rolex is the largest single high end watch brand, producing about 2,000 watches per day.

Obvious to its popularity, Rolex is surrounded with a lot of controversies as well.

In 2004, Benjamin Clymer who is the founder of influential watch magazine and website, Hodinkee, wrote “There are more fake Rolex watches on this planet than all other fakes combined. We can multiply the number of fake Rolex watches in existence by 100 if we include the ones that have been modified in some way after they have left the factory.”

He was pointing out to an Oyster Black Dial Paul Newman Daytona that went up for auction. According to him, the watch “has some traits that are commonly believed to not be authentic.”

The reason for plenty of these cases might be the way Rolex, 113-year old watch brand, distinguishes between real and fake.

According to the plaintiff which is a Swiss-transplant brand, founded by Hans Wilsdorf and Alfred Davis in London, England in 1905, replacing even a part of this authentic watch with any non-Rolex part will be counted as a fraudulent imitation, including any non-brand additions to it.

On July 23, 2018, Rolex filed a case against Vintage Watchmaker LLC and its owner Jensen Dinh in an Arizona federal court, which is a company that manufactures quality replacement parts for popular vintage branded watches and custom vintage watch builds.

But the plaintiff claims that the products sold by the vintage watchmaker are falsely advertised and are sold under the name of Rolex which misleads the customers.

Rolex blames Vintage Watchmaker saying that their acts “are deliberately calculated to confuse and deceive the public and are performed with full knowledge of Rolex’s rights. The complainant believes that these acts constitute wilful and deliberate infringement of Rolex’s registered trademarks, to the detriment of the Swiss watch company, because “Rolex is not able to monitor, enforce, or maintain its quality control standards on the counterfeit Rolex products that Vintage Watchmaker assembles, offers for sale, and sells.”

Rolex believes that Vintage Watchmaker caused confusion in the minds of consumers where consumers misinterpreted the defendant’s products for being authorized, sponsored or approved by the complainant, when they are not. They fear that this vintage watchmaker has unfairly benefited from Rolex’s reputation and their registered trademarks, and that authentic Rolex products have turned into counterfeit ones. They pointed out that it has caused a substantial and irreparable injury to the public and their status in the market.

The Swiss brand wants the vintage watchmaker to payback for its deeds and is seeking a momentary sum of three times the plaintiff’s damages and/or the defendants’ profits, whichever is greater. It has also requested injunctive relief for Vintage Watchmaker’s “deliberate trademark counterfeit”. It wants the defendant to permanently and immediately terminate the use of its trademarks.

To visit website, Trademarkclick.com: Click Here

Picture Source :