Fakes, what's the feeling?
Discussion
Philip0 said:
Fakes/counterfeits are illegal - the people who make them are often the same organisations which use child labour, pay low wages, or produce fake medicines, car parts etc. You might think it's OK to buy a fake watch or handbag, but how would you feel if someone fitted poor quality brakes to your car or gave incorrect drugs to your loved ones. It's not only crass to buy and wear fakes, it's against the law.
Its not illegal to either buy or wear a replica watch in the UK. It is in other parts of Europe but not the UK. variomatic in another thread on PH said:
It's not quite as straightforward as bobbybee suggests.
Trade mark offences come under the Trade Marks Act 1994 and only apply to people using trade marks "in the course of trade", so private sales aren't an offence. The chances are that every one of those listings on Gumtree will claim to be private sellers (whether or not they are) so before establishing an offence you'd also hae to establish that they were trading.
You could also argue that the Act may not apply to the obvious fakes because an offence is committed in one of three circumstances:
S.10(1) using an identical mark in relation to identical goods. Even Rolex would be at pains to point out that the copies aren't identical to theirs, so that's out the window.
S.10(2) using an identical or similar mark on similar goods where "there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public". If you label it clearly in all advertising as "copy / fake / replica" then there's no chance of confusion, so 10(2) doesn't apply.
S.10(3) using an identical or similar mark on goods that are NOT similar "where the trade mark has a reputation in the United Kingdom and the use of the sign, being without due cause, takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or the repute of the trade mark"
Under that, you could argue that a replica is similar so the section doesn't apply, and you could also argue that the obvious fakes are so bad and so obvious that they have no detriment to the repute of the originals.
Which only really leaves "taking unfair advantage of" as a possible offence. Personally I think that should be enough, because no-one would buy a known fake Rolex if it wasn't for the reputation of the real ones but, seeing as they're usually selling to people who're very unlikely to ever be in the market for a real one, even that might be arguable.
As long as they're being completely honest about what they are and no-one's being ripped off, I can think of far more important things for the UK justice system to spend its limited resources on than chasing victimless trademark offences (as opposed to real fakery where the buyer loses out on something they think is real).
If Rolex have a problem with it they're more than welcome to spend their own money taking civil action, but I'd rather our police were out catching real speeders.
Crassness is a matter of opinion and will vary from person to person but fair enough if thats your opinion. Personally I couldn't care less what someone wears. Trade mark offences come under the Trade Marks Act 1994 and only apply to people using trade marks "in the course of trade", so private sales aren't an offence. The chances are that every one of those listings on Gumtree will claim to be private sellers (whether or not they are) so before establishing an offence you'd also hae to establish that they were trading.
You could also argue that the Act may not apply to the obvious fakes because an offence is committed in one of three circumstances:
S.10(1) using an identical mark in relation to identical goods. Even Rolex would be at pains to point out that the copies aren't identical to theirs, so that's out the window.
S.10(2) using an identical or similar mark on similar goods where "there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public". If you label it clearly in all advertising as "copy / fake / replica" then there's no chance of confusion, so 10(2) doesn't apply.
S.10(3) using an identical or similar mark on goods that are NOT similar "where the trade mark has a reputation in the United Kingdom and the use of the sign, being without due cause, takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or the repute of the trade mark"
Under that, you could argue that a replica is similar so the section doesn't apply, and you could also argue that the obvious fakes are so bad and so obvious that they have no detriment to the repute of the originals.
Which only really leaves "taking unfair advantage of" as a possible offence. Personally I think that should be enough, because no-one would buy a known fake Rolex if it wasn't for the reputation of the real ones but, seeing as they're usually selling to people who're very unlikely to ever be in the market for a real one, even that might be arguable.
As long as they're being completely honest about what they are and no-one's being ripped off, I can think of far more important things for the UK justice system to spend its limited resources on than chasing victimless trademark offences (as opposed to real fakery where the buyer loses out on something they think is real).
If Rolex have a problem with it they're more than welcome to spend their own money taking civil action, but I'd rather our police were out catching real speeders.
Edited by lostkiwi on Wednesday 10th February 13:46
Edited by lostkiwi on Wednesday 10th February 13:54
bobbybee said:
OK, I'll have to take your word for it. But,
Where do Turlex get the same grade Stainless Steel, Gold and Platinum?
Where did they get the Rolex tooling from?
Are they tested to the same extremes?
Are they COSC tested?
Are they warrantied for 5 years initially, then 2 years after every RSC service?
Are you able to walk into any worldwide Turlex SC and get your watch seen to by a Turlex tech?
Answers are:
They can't, they didn't, they're not, they can't be, they're not, you can't
So not the same at all are they, what they are, are cheap fakes with stolen TM and IP
OK, in order. Thanks because I have several and have sold several/couldnt give a toss its not being used on a space mission its on a wrist/who knows or cares/as long as it works I'm fine/whats COSC it hasnt given me sleepless nights put it that way/if every 5 years I buy another (which I wont need to) I'll have spent £150 in a lifetime so it beats the hell out of £3000++/Turlex tech? see the last answer.Where do Turlex get the same grade Stainless Steel, Gold and Platinum?
Where did they get the Rolex tooling from?
Are they tested to the same extremes?
Are they COSC tested?
Are they warrantied for 5 years initially, then 2 years after every RSC service?
Are you able to walk into any worldwide Turlex SC and get your watch seen to by a Turlex tech?
Answers are:
They can't, they didn't, they're not, they can't be, they're not, you can't
So not the same at all are they, what they are, are cheap fakes with stolen TM and IP
bobbybee said:
OK, I'll have to take your word for it. But,
Where do Turlex get the same grade Stainless Steel, Gold and Platinum?
Where did they get the Rolex tooling from?
Are they tested to the same extremes?
Are they COSC tested?
Are they warrantied for 5 years initially, then 2 years after every RSC service?
Are you able to walk into any worldwide Turlex SC and get your watch seen to by a Turlex tech?
Answers are:
They can't, they didn't, they're not, they can't be, they're not, you can't
So not the same at all are they, what they are, are cheap fakes with stolen TM and IP
Where do Turlex get the same grade Stainless Steel, Gold and Platinum?
Where did they get the Rolex tooling from?
Are they tested to the same extremes?
Are they COSC tested?
Are they warrantied for 5 years initially, then 2 years after every RSC service?
Are you able to walk into any worldwide Turlex SC and get your watch seen to by a Turlex tech?
Answers are:
They can't, they didn't, they're not, they can't be, they're not, you can't
So not the same at all are they, what they are, are cheap fakes with stolen TM and IP
V6Pushfit said:
OK, in order. Thanks because I have several and have sold several/couldnt give a toss its not being used on a space mission its on a wrist/who knows or cares/as long as it works I'm fine/whats COSC it hasnt given me sleepless nights put it that way/if every 5 years I buy another (which I wont need to) I'll have spent £150 in a lifetime so it beats the hell out of £3000++/Turlex tech? see the last answer.
Smart aren't you? have all the answers to 'support' fakes, so smart for admitting on an open forum that you have committed a crime, repeatedlySo into watches including your genuine ones (allegedly) but you don't know what COSC is
Therefore you agree, they aren't the same, so contradicting yourself, as previously you said
V6Pushfit said:
Go to Turkey and see the Rolexes churned out form the Rolex tooling, its the same stuff.
V6Pushfit said:
OK, in order. Thanks because I have several and have sold several/couldnt give a toss its not being used on a space mission its on a wrist/who knows or cares/as long as it works I'm fine/whats COSC it hasnt given me sleepless nights put it that way/if every 5 years I buy another (which I wont need to) I'll have spent £150 in a lifetime so it beats the hell out of £3000++/Turlex tech? see the last answer.
You're obviously a consumer that values things differently to others, and particularly those that visit the watches section on this forum. Each to their own. This thread will be going round in circles though now with those who 'couldn't care less' and those that could. One person won't see the value in spending £3k on a watch where as the next person will. Same goes for any type of clothing, jewellery, electronics or other consumer goods. Question though....why would you buy a sh*t fake rolex over an arguably better made seiko / casio / tissot?
Quickmoose said:
Do many people show off their buckles then?
With my last Panerai I had 3 straps, the original had a Panerai buckle, the other 2 had non branded buckles of the same shape or thereabouts. Just plain metal, I don't see the importance to brand every bit that can be branded... for me the skill and engineering is in the fiddly bits that tell the time
Exactly this. With my last Panerai I had 3 straps, the original had a Panerai buckle, the other 2 had non branded buckles of the same shape or thereabouts. Just plain metal, I don't see the importance to brand every bit that can be branded... for me the skill and engineering is in the fiddly bits that tell the time
It's the watch that matters.
I have some made to order straps for some of my watches, from Combat Straps, that have aftermarket buckles in the original design on them. Some steel, some bronze. I'm not going to spend £500 on poxy buckles to appease anal watch fetishists.
If I'm ever unfortunate enough to have a conversation about this in person, I'd say it's an aftermarket strap with matching buckle simply for convenience sake.
Can't believe there's 4 pages of arguments over this triviality.
Who the f
k notices a watch buckle! 
bobbybee said:
^^^^^
Good point, the answer is simple, anyone saying otherwise is deluding themselves, or just plain lying
Fakes are bought by fools to fool, that's it. Irrespective of motive, or pretence that you have more disposable income than you actually have
Not entirely.Good point, the answer is simple, anyone saying otherwise is deluding themselves, or just plain lying
Fakes are bought by fools to fool, that's it. Irrespective of motive, or pretence that you have more disposable income than you actually have
I bought a fake Panerai because I simply adored the design, couldn't afford a real one and at that time was not aware of copies/hommages or other brands that looked similar.
I simply saw a Panerai, wanted one and then went on line to buy one...
Mates noticed my new watch "yeah..its a copy but it looks and feels nice.." none of the people I know or care about, could care less what's on my wrist.
Later I bought a real one, and I 'felt' good (smug?)
Are we not supposed to be discussing the straps though?
Quickmoose said:
bobbybee said:
^^^^^
Good point, the answer is simple, anyone saying otherwise is deluding themselves, or just plain lying
Fakes are bought by fools to fool, that's it. Irrespective of motive, or pretence that you have more disposable income than you actually have
Not entirely.Good point, the answer is simple, anyone saying otherwise is deluding themselves, or just plain lying
Fakes are bought by fools to fool, that's it. Irrespective of motive, or pretence that you have more disposable income than you actually have
I bought a fake Panerai because I simply adored the design, couldn't afford a real one and at that time was not aware of copies/hommages or other brands that looked similar.
I simply saw a Panerai, wanted one and then went on line to buy one...
Mates noticed my new watch "yeah..its a copy but it looks and feels nice.." none of the people I know or care about, could care less what's on my wrist.
Later I bought a real one, and I 'felt' good (smug?)
Are we not supposed to be discussing the straps though?
bobbybee said:
Quickmoose said:
bobbybee said:
^^^^^
Good point, the answer is simple, anyone saying otherwise is deluding themselves, or just plain lying
Fakes are bought by fools to fool, that's it. Irrespective of motive, or pretence that you have more disposable income than you actually have
Not entirely.Good point, the answer is simple, anyone saying otherwise is deluding themselves, or just plain lying
Fakes are bought by fools to fool, that's it. Irrespective of motive, or pretence that you have more disposable income than you actually have
I bought a fake Panerai because I simply adored the design, couldn't afford a real one and at that time was not aware of copies/hommages or other brands that looked similar.
I simply saw a Panerai, wanted one and then went on line to buy one...
Mates noticed my new watch "yeah..its a copy but it looks and feels nice.." none of the people I know or care about, could care less what's on my wrist.
Later I bought a real one, and I 'felt' good (smug?)
Are we not supposed to be discussing the straps though?
bobbybee said:
Quickmoose said:
But I wasn't a fool trying to fool
Whatever helps you sleep at night, you still knowingly bought a fake
I sleep just fine, before I bought it, after I bought, after it broke and after I bought a real one.
But you keep posting your sweeping generalisations that help you judge with preconceived 'knowledge'.
This topic is about people's views, just a shame the watch fraternity don't like views that contradict theirs and trot out the usual objections to fakes whilst probably having one themselves to wear at times when they don't want to risk the real thing, , like I do. We have had crime, drugs, lack of space mission quality steel and all sorts to justify the real deal but the fact of the matter and hard truth is they are just watches to tell the time and be used and personally I don't care who wears fakes and don't judge them on it.
The irony is no one has queried the accuracy of fakes, which would be my only concern, and on the basis I've never had an inaccurate one yet then they do what the are intended to nicely as far as I can see.
The irony is no one has queried the accuracy of fakes, which would be my only concern, and on the basis I've never had an inaccurate one yet then they do what the are intended to nicely as far as I can see.
V6Pushfit said:
This topic is about people's views, just a shame the watch fraternity don't like views that contradict theirs and trot out the usual objections to fakes whilst probably having one themselves to wear at times when they don't want to risk the real thing, , like I do. We have had crime, drugs, lack of space mission quality steel and all sorts to justify the real deal but the fact of the matter and hard truth is they are just watches to tell the time and be used and personally I don't care who wears fakes and don't judge them on it.
The irony is no one has queried the accuracy of fakes, which would be my only concern, and on the basis I've never had an inaccurate one yet then they do what the are intended to nicely as far as I can see.
^Exactly this^The irony is no one has queried the accuracy of fakes, which would be my only concern, and on the basis I've never had an inaccurate one yet then they do what the are intended to nicely as far as I can see.
But I suppose both you and me have both gen and rep, so we see both sides of the coin, but the ones who buy fakes never get as venomous, they could be spouting off how idiotic people are to spend 10x the cost for a watch that is nigh on identical, but we don't as we see why you do buy gen, I just don't want £7k's worth of watch getting scuffed or pinched(never wear it on the tube!).
V6Pushfit said:
This topic is about people's views, just a shame the watch fraternity don't like views that contradict theirs and trot out the usual objections to fakes whilst probably having one themselves to wear at times when they don't want to risk the real thing, , like I do.
As many here have tried to say, you are perfectly entitled to your opinion.If you are proud to wear counterfeit goods passed off as the real thing, then that's good for you.
There are a number of very good reasons why it is against the law to sell counterfeit products, and I think very good reasons why it doesn't make sense to buy them. Particularly when you could buy very similar versions of many designs without needing to infringe the law.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff