WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,214 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I happened to fumble across this website STRELA | СТÐ.ЕЛÐ� - Official STRELA Watch and chronograph site while trying to find information to joggle my memory on how to set the date on the 3133. I have never visited this site before, is it connected in any way to Julian Kampmann watches at Poljot24 - Russische Qualitätsuhren | Poljot 24 since he is based out of Germany?

Either way, I was immediately drawn to the Strela TR42CYM 42mm chronograph. The $742 USD price tags deters me from getting one. I had my chance on the smaller 38mm a couple years selling under $300 USD with Russia2all. Enough of my rant, it is a thing of beauty.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,426 Posts
Mr. Levenberg managed to acquire the rights for the trademark StrelaСтрела in some countries. He is now doing the same with Molnia/Молния

Strela/Стрела was refused in Russia because of the prior use by 1MChZ and potential misleading claim of origin.

This means that he has acquired the right from the German trademark agency to forbid the use and sale of Strela by Volmax in Germany, and certain foreign countries

Now you know the story behind "Strela in Germany". The right is limited to Germany and certain countries, and since there was no opposition filed locally by Volmax or whoever inherited the 1MChZ rights, it was granted.

As a matter of fact, I think that there was a first reedition of Strela by late 1MChZ, then by Poljot International Schorokhoff in Germany (the official importer of 1MChZ in those days), then by Volmax (a top quality expensive one), then came in the West a wave of Levenberg (and others) Strela in different flavors.

The present status of these Trademark applications as of today, 23 June 2015 is the following.

STRELA

AU (Australia)
Statement of grant of protection (11 December 2014)

BY (Belarus)
Subsequent designation, i.e. still being examined (12 February 2015)

CN (China)
Statement of grant of protection (05 January 2012)

DE (Germany)
Statement of grant of protection (05 July 2010)

KZ (Kazakhstan)
Statement of grant of protection (05 March 2015)

RU (Russia)
Confirmation of total provisional refusal (04 July 2013)

SG (Singapore)
Statement of grant of protection following a provisional refusal (01 August 2013)

UA (Ukraine)
Statement of grant of protection (23 April 2015)

US (USA)
Statement of grant of protection following a provisional refusal (30 August 2012)

VN (Vietnam)
Statement of grant of protection (04 June 2015)

СТРЕЛА

AU (Australia)
Statement of grant of protection (18 December 2014)

BY (Belarus)
Subsequent designation, i.e. still being examined (12 February 2015)

CN (China)
Statement of grant of protection (15 May 2014)

DE (Germany)
Statement of grant of protection (05 July 2010)

KZ (Kazakhstan)
Statement of grant of protection (05 March 2015)

RU (Russia)
Confirmation of total provisional refusal (19 February 2015)

SG (Singapore)
Statement of grant of protection following a provisional refusal (04 June 2015)

UA (Ukraine)
Statement of grant of protection (23 April 2015)

US (USA)
Statement of grant of protection following a provisional refusal (11 December 2014)

VN (Vietnam)
Statement of grant of protection (04 June 2015)

MOLNIJA

CH (Switzerland)
Registration (20 August 2014)

DE (Germany)
Statement of grant of protection (02 May 2014)

CN (China)
Statement of grant of protection (16 April 2015)

SG (Singapore)
Ex Officio examination completed but opposition or observations by third parties still possible (07.05.2015)

МОЛНИЯ

CH (Switzerland)
Pending registration

DE (Germany)
Statement of grant of protection (02 May 2014)

CN (China)
Pending registration

SG (Singapore)
Pending registration

As you see, the choice of countries/states for the applications to Trademark is critical and strategical, either that one has some manufacture or some market in said states.

I will let you draw your conclusion...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,087 Posts
Mr. Levenberg managed to acquire the rights for the trademark Strela in some countries.

It was refused in Russia and some other countries because of the prior use by 1MChZ and potential misleading claim of origin. This means that he has acquired the right from the German trademark agency to forbid the use and sale of Strela by Volmax in Germany! Now you know the story behind Strela in Germany. The right is limited to Germany, and since there was no opposition filed locally by Volmax or whoever inherited the 1MChZ rights, it was granted...
This is just not right!

With all respect to Mr. Levenberg, he's nobody when it comes to Strela name. I mean - on what grounds was he grated the rights to the name? Just because no one from Russian makers claimed the name - it doesn't make a random person eligible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,426 Posts
This is just not right!

With all respect to Mr. Levenberg, he's nobody when it comes to Strela name. I mean - on what grounds was he grated the rights to the name? Just because no one from Russian makers claimed the name - it doesn't make a random person eligible.
The law is about the same everywhere: if in a given country, there is neither a prior application for a trademark by some earlier competitor, nor a later opposition to the trademark being registered, then... It is registered and maintained as long as its owner pays!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
420 Posts
The law is about the same everywhere: if in a given country, there is neither a prior application for a trademark by some earlier competitor, nor a later opposition to the trademark being registered, then... It is registered and maintained as long as its owner pays!
It is not very clear whether the government of the former Soviet Union, which owned the assets of the First Moscow Watch Factory while it was active, ever trademarked "Strela" in the first place. Within the FSU, no one was going to contest the government's use of that name, so why bother to trademark it internally? And, at the time, there was no point in the government bothering to trademark the name outside the FSU (even if such a thing would have been permitted in Western countries during the Cold War era) because no watchmaker outside the FSU was going to make a watch with a Russian name like "Strela". Until Mr. Levenberg thought of reviving the brand, I doubt anyone had registered "Strela" as a trademark for watches anywhere in the world.

This is just not right!

With all respect to Mr. Levenberg, he's nobody when it comes to Strela name. I mean - on what grounds was he grated the rights to the name? Just because no one from Russian makers claimed the name - it doesn't make a random person eligible.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but my personal view is that Mr. Levenberg didn't misappropriate anything that belonged to someone else. He revived a name that had been abandoned and he invested the money to put that name on a high-quality watch that many of us on f10 now enjoy wearing. Reviving old brand names is a common practice in the watchmaking world these days - whether you like old names being revived and applied to modern products is up to you. I would certainly prefer that the modern Strela was still made in Russia with 100% Russian components but, given the choice between Mr. Levenberg's Strelas and no Strelas at all, I'm happy with Mr. Levenberg's Strelas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,214 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
It is not very clear whether the government of the former Soviet Union, which owned the assets of the First Moscow Watch Factory while it was active, ever trademarked "Strela" in the first place. Within the FSU, no one was going to contest the government's use of that name, so why bother to trademark it internally? And, at the time, there was no point in the government bothering to trademark the name outside the FSU (even if such a thing would have been permitted in Western countries during the Cold War era) because no watchmaker outside the FSU was going to make a watch with a Russian name like "Strela". Until Mr. Levenberg thought of reviving the brand, I doubt anyone had registered "Strela" as a trademark for watches anywhere in the world.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but my personal view is that Mr. Levenberg didn't misappropriate anything that belonged to someone else. He revived a name that had been abandoned and he invested the money to put that name on a high-quality watch that many of us on f10 now enjoy wearing. Reviving old brand names is a common practice in the watchmaking world these days - whether you like old names being revived and applied to modern products is up to you. I would certainly prefer that the modern Strela was still made in Russia with 100% Russian components but, given the choice between Mr. Levenberg's Strelas and no Strelas at all, I'm happy with Mr. Levenberg's Strelas.
Good hindsight, even though the modern Strela doesn't carry the heart of the First Moscow Watch Factory, it's soul still lives with Mr. Levenberg's variant.
 

·
Mod. Russian, China Mech.
Joined
·
19,631 Posts
This is just not right!

With all respect to Mr. Levenberg, he's nobody when it comes to Strela name. I mean - on what grounds was he grated the rights to the name? Just because no one from Russian makers claimed the name - it doesn't make a random person eligible.
Alpha

Rodina

W. Gabus

J. Harrison

Arnold & Son

Those are just a few names that have lapsed completely before being revived like Frankenstein. If we also consider those that have limped along near death before being rebooted, or the name held in cold-storage by a holding company, or traded over and over until nothing of the original is left then you can consider the likes of Invicta, Enicar, Leon Hatot, Hampden, Waltham, Ingersoll, Hamilton, Pavel Bure....

This is the way of the world.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,087 Posts
Kudos to JL for making watches under Strela name!

However, I am just concerned that if someone else decides to make Strelas JL can legally prosecute them and stop such effort. Why is he granted such protection if JL did not contribute to design of the logo, the watch, dial or the case?

If the trademark was not claimed by former manufacturer, then the name should be in public domain and available to anyone.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top