< Back to latest news & events

Retail Scanner

When is a genuine product no longer ‘genuine’?

September 2018

Legitimate spare part or counterfeit? Rolex has issued proceedings in the U.S against Vintage Watchmaker LLC for offering “non-Rolex approved” replacement parts. Rolex argue that these turn an otherwise legitimate Rolex watch into a counterfeit good.

This raises the question of whether a genuine good can become a counterfeit product by virtue of replacement parts not supplied or authorised by the original manufacturer.

The World Intellectual Property Organisation defines counterfeit goods as “any goods bearing, without authorisation, a trade mark identical to the trade mark validly registered in respect of such goods, or which cannot be distinguished in essential aspects, thereby infringing the rights of the owner.” In this case the traditional definition of counterfeit does not necessarily appear to be present. The watch itself is legitimately bearing the Rolex mark, but do “non-Rolex” spare parts make it counterfeit?

The applicable law concerns an overlap between designs and trade marks. In the UK and EU, the case Acacia (EU:C:2017:992) determined that the design of goods can be copied to create spare parts, provided for repair and to restore original appearance. This then overlaps with trade mark law, as the promotion of  spare parts as compatible with the original manufacturer requires referring to the brand, which raises the possibility of trade mark infringement. Here, Vintage Watchmaker arguably must use the “Rolex” mark to enable consumers to understand that the parts such as a replacement dial or strap can be used for their luxury watch. However, would the use of non-branded spare parts change the physical condition of the traded goods and thus be considered to be trade mark infringement.

In an ever-expanding consumerist society, counterfeit is becoming ever more prevalent, challenging and nuanced to retailers and brand owners. Consumers want a good deal in the marketplace which inevitably raises the possibility of alternative less expensive options. It will be interesting to see whether Rolex succeed in the litigation and the inevitable issue for retailers is how to make products which are hard to reproduce for the purposes of spare parts without infringing intellectual property rights such as designs, trademarks and even patents.

Latest updates

Gender diversity at the UPC

In Europe, women remain grossly under-represented in research and innovation. A recent study by the European Patent Office (EPO) found that only 13.2% of inventors in Europe are women. The …

Read article
Event - 29th November 2022

LSPN Europe 2022

HGF is a silver sponsor of LSPN Europe 2022 on 29th November in London. This event will explore some of the biggest challenges facing the Life Sciences Patent Community right now …

Event details

Oral Proceedings by videoconference (VICO) in oppositions proceedings to become permanent

The pilot project for oral proceedings in opposition proceedings by video conference (VICO) started during the pandemic and has received positive feedback.[1] The President of the EPO has therefore declared …

Read article
Event - 9th December 2022

Health Tech Conference 2022

HGF is a premium sponsor of the pro-manchester Health Tech conference on Friday 9th December. This conference looks at exploring what new and innovative ideas have been developed in the …

Event details

Comparing the value of European vs Unitary Patent Validation

The EPO’s European patent system is on the brink of the biggest change in a generation – from 2023 it is expected that a new unitary patent (UP) will become …

Read article

EPO sets start of Unitary Patent transitional measures as 1 January 2023

The EPO has announced that it intends to adjust the start date of its transitional measures for Unitary Patents (UP) to 1 January 2023. From that date, applicants who have …

Read article