So, I wrapped up my call with my IP attorney about an hour ago.
I'm not paying him to have an opinion about the Kiger Milsub case, so I only gave him the Reader's Digest version. His response was that Rolex could (or should) get laughed out of the USPTO office, UNLESS they can show prior use of the "Milsub" term - prior to Kiger's use of it.
As for me, he basically said:
1. Shut up, Chris. Stop talking about it.
There was more, but on the advice of legal counsel, I'm not going to talk about it. We'll have to wait and see what happens.
That point 1, he just meant generally.
2. “Nod to History.” You and I know. T-Effin-M
Thanks for getting all the “lawyers” to the yard, doc, reminds me why I don’t practice law
Gents, freal, there are knowable facts that make most of this story a non-story.
A few watch geeks refer to Rolex Submariner-a literal ripoff of a mil-spec watch, nothing original about dial design but logo and name-as “milsub.” Rolex never called it that. Never printed it on dial. Can’t find the word on the website. Just unrelated geeks nicknaming it.
Kiger registers and uses before Rolex.
Now Rolex says milsub is indistinguishable from Rolex. ********. It’s used routinely to refer, also, to any watch that looks plus/minus like that mil-spec dial Victor found behind some file cabinet.
Sure, Kiger could lose the mark, but that doesn’t mean Rolex gets it. Rolex would have to show prior use. It can’t.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk