Since you would like to make that point beyond the analogy for which I used them above, I'll make the counterpoint, Michael, that when used for legitimate military purpose and law enforcement, and in equally legitimate legal self-defence, then that particular capability which you ascribe to handguns is quite appropriate.Originally Posted by Michael A
Hi Rollon
Thanks for the insight. I'm not clued up on the law here but I'm guessing copyright issues and expired patents are similar but having read the thread regarding Eddie's battle with Omega, Timefactors are on the Omega radar as it were and whether a law has been broken or not Omega don't seem to worry about sending in the lawyers.
As far as I can tell Eddie is in the right over the Broadarrow conflict but still at a loss financially. So it were me I'd try to avoid another episode.
Chris
Sorry Rollon. I was being a bit dry and did not communicate very well the position of my tongue relative to my cheek in my remark. I will now desist from derailing this thread. :)Since you would like to make that point beyond the analogy for which I used them above, I'll make the counterpoint, Michael, that when used for legitimate military purpose and law enforcement, and in equally legitimate legal self-defence, then that particular capability which you ascribe to handguns is quite appropriate.
AFAIK if Omega where to take action over the 14 it would be on the grounds of "passing of" IMHO, in essence the claim would be saying that the 14 sells by virtue of the fact that it looks like an SM300. Now as Omega don't currently make an SM300 I don't think this sort of action is likely to happen, surely? The example quoted by Eddie is much more clear cut in this regard.
Patents don't come into it since of course any patents would have expired a long time ago, did Omega invent anything when they designed the SM300? Design rights are a different issue, not sure what the time scales are on design rights but did Omega register any of these designs?
Regardless of any of these IPR discussions I would prefer a "new" 14 to look much more like a unique design and less like the SM300. I really like the idea of for example a kontiki case with MoD spec bezel, dial and hands, of course this would then look like a design never used by the MoD but IMHO that's the point, because it would still have the look of a vintage issued watch but would be a watch design in its own right.
I'd love to see it with date (black date wheel), domed saphire, and it's got to have a nice curved end, matching bracelet (not mesh).The no bracelet available has been the deal breaker in the past.
Andy
[quote=Michael A]Sorry Rollon. I was being a bit dry and did not communicate very well the position of my tongue relative to my cheek in my remark. I will now desist from derailing this thread. :)[/quote:170ogaf5]Since you would like to make that point beyond the analogy for which I used them above, I'll make the counterpoint, Michael, that when used for legitimate military purpose and law enforcement, and in equally legitimate legal self-defence, then that particular capability which you ascribe to handguns is quite appropriate.
Michael, NO problem whatever :pirate:
Chris,
I certainly understand your caution to stay on the safe side of matters like that. Additional factors would also bear for you, or anybody else in your position, especially, because, as a professional focused on creative original aesthetic design yourself, duplicating the existing designs of others would naturally and in due course be anathema to you as a conscientious professional as would be the thought of plagiarizing an original source or being perceived as having done so.
I personally think probably the ideal best hope is that Timefactors has full access to the most accurate and comprehensively complete range of applicable legal information and advice available directly from practicing specialist legal professionals who are highly competent and experienced with world-wide watch industry issues so as to allow, if TF so chooses, the most accurate duplication of classic military and other vintage watch designs legally possible without ever leaving TF legally open or vulnerable to substantively viable legal assault from the likes of Swatch, Rolex, Richemont, or anybody else in the future.
NJH,
I'm guessing, and may well be wrong, but I would think, and hope, that the "passing off" you mention above as conceptual grounds for pursuing viable legal action in British law against a homaging watch company would require not only that the homaging copy of the original sells because it "looks like" the original, but that it sells because people think it is the original.
Hi Rollon,
What worries me is that in a court Omega could rustle up someone from an Omega AD, hold up an SM300 and a PRS-14 and ask the question would these 2 watches look the same to your customers. The problem is Omega have already pulled a similar stunt on Eddie in the Broadarrow fiasco so I can 100% understand why he may be feeling somewhat uneasy about re-releasing the 14.
The only answer is legal advice - and that costs. Licensing and copyright/trademark issues seem particularly complex.
And for me add
c) lack of fitted bracelet
_Amer
Hi NJH. I think the Precista PRS-14 was sold throughout and well after the legal matter that Omega/Swatch pursued aggressively against Timefactors had ended. The copyright name disputed "Broadarrow" brand line of TF watches ended at the time of the lawsuit, a casualty of it. However, the Precista PRS-14 that very closely homaged the Omega SM300 of the 1960s continued until all stock sold out a few weeks ago and I assume that is because Swatch had no grounds to action Eddie as regards it. If your specific concern above was a legally viable one, I don't know why Swatch didn't move on Eddie over the PRS-14 when they had him in court.
I have a feeling that after the dust up with Omega and Swatch, Eddie is very adept at these types of legal issues and I hope he has available the very finest professional specialist legal advice as needed going forward.
I certainly hope so Rollon. My 14 is/was the only watch I have flipped that I miss and this despite several things about it that I wasn't keen on. Would love to see a new one because I am in the minority round here in not really liking the various G10 and IWC inspired watches, bezels do it for me and the 14 has the nicest looking and feeling bezel I have tried yet, only the tiniest amount movement in there stopped it from being perfect.
Would love to see the PRS14 make a comeback. I've voted to keep it the same, as I wouldn't want to see any changes to the watch itself, but I'd love to see it available with a bracelet.
Gary
Dito.Would love to see the PRS14 make a comeback. I've voted to keep it the same, as I wouldn't want to see any changes to the watch itself, but I'd love to see it available with a bracelet.
I think that this watch should reflect the original MOD specification. Eddie made it right from the beginning if you asking me. I hope he will sell it again because I think it is his number 1 watch.
/Dawe
The main thing I would ask for in a re-issued PRS-14 is a thinner case. lovely watch but it was just much too top heavy for me.
A wider case to accomodate a larger dial and hands would be nice too. something like 42mm x 12-13mm would be perfect. Wider more dominant hands too would be great, especially the hour hand.
I feel the same but the problem is the anti-mag may have to go. I know the EZM3 manages a really high anit-mag rating in a thin case but this apparently couldn't be done with the 14.
From personal experience, I have to agree that the PRS-14 was top heavy.
What if the case was made larger (42mm) and slimmer and yet still keeping the AM shielding?
The 2824 would have to go and probably a 2892 would be needed. The problem would be cost and availability. The chinese ST26 could be part of the answer: it could be the regular movement but a 2892 could still be available upon request. Or the owner could have his watch so modified at a later date by other watchmaker.
It would be great to know what the eventual provider of such a piece would have to say about all of what we have been saying so far. After all it would be him to make Ł, € and $ out of it...
Top heavy... what kind of strap are you using that makes the current PRS-14 top heavy?
I wear mine on a think Toshi and it feels perfect to me :D
That was my personal experience. That does not make it a scientific fact.
I wore it with a rubber deployant strap, the original rally strap, a NATO and a 1171 Omega bracelet.
I felt it was bit top heavy, yes.
If you don´t feel it that way, good for you! :wink:
If you want to cut this watch's height by a trivial 1.3 to 2.3 millimeters, and short of changing to the slimmer ETA 2892 design movement, you will lose the technologically beautiful high specification IWC type soft iron dial and movement cage that is engineered into this model to make it much less vulnerable to magnetism. As mechanical watches lacking this feature are apparently fairly commonly magnetized and the consistency and accuracy of their timing rate sent more or less haywire by common sources of magnetism in the household and elsewhere, and by more exotic and aggressive sources of magnetism in some professional pursuits, etc., the high specification soft iron dial and movement cage is what makes this particular watch stand out, in my eyes at least, from the ubiquitously available and overwelmingly vast number of low technical specification dive watches designed predominantly around often very nice superficial cosmetic effect and otherwise cheap-easy-fast manufacture in more ways than one.I feel the same but the problem is the anti-mag may have to go. I know the EZM3 manages a really high anit-mag rating in a thin case but this apparently couldn't be done with the 14.
To my view there can be a huge difference between a good watch that looks good and a watch that just looks good, so I personally hope any future incarnation of the PRS-14 retains its beautiful high spec antimagnetic mov't cage and improves on its past self by incorporation of the original 1960s SM300's Mark XI type internally secured screw-down crystal design using a heavy and coarsely threaded steel retaining ring* and updated with crystal material respective interchangeable CTE** correlated temperature compensating metal washers that would allow the interchange of sapphire and acrylic or polycarbonate crystals in the same watch; a screwed-in crown tube meeting the now generic and ubiquitously available Rolex Triplelock specifications(assuming there are no legal problems involved in that at this point) to guarantee replacement part and gasketing supply; Speedbird 3 bracelet style removeable screw-cap solid lugbar pins; a nicely and discreetly incorporated date window; Sinn U2 EZM5 style DIAL/MOVEMENT PLATE ATTACHED twin desiccant capsule case moisture absorbing technology IF ---IF --- such is no longer legally protected by patent rights or any other standing legal protections of any kind; upgraded lume glow duration with the rumoured newly developed SuperLuminova "24Hour" type lume if such ever becomes available; materially upgraded water resistance sealing with high spec Viton type gasketing; reengineered caselugs so that the watch sits a bit better and more comfortably on the wrist; an optionally available Timefactors heavy-duty open end-link type Omega style mesh bracelet with a redundantly secure simultaneous push activated release opposing twin tab lock-up with auxiliary flip-up security hood lock dive type clasp; a standard production ETA specification movement of Swiss origin(or a Chinese origin ETA specification cloned duplicative counterpart if it's absolutely necessary), with a full on Swiss origin ETA chronometer grade/NO-COSC paperwork version of the same movement available on special order at extra cost and wait time.
I put all of the above ideas in a long post at the first page of this thread if anybody is interested. However, since writing that, and while prefacing this with the fact that I have a near personal revulsion of things made in Red China at the same time I am trying to be realistic, the idea put up that I really like and personally thought excellent was the one Luso had above of using the easily available Chinese ETA 2892 specification clone movement that Bob(RFrazier) tested(see TZ-UK "Classic Posts" subforum here) for the production movement with the full-on Swiss ETA 2892 chronometer grade version of the same movement available on an optional pre-paid special order extra cost/extra wait-time basis. Even if the special order option of the Swiss origin(?) ETA 2892 chronometer mov't was not workable or not available for Eddie, any individual owner dissatisfied with the Chinese ETA 2892 clone mov't in the stock watch would have the option of sourcing the higher grade Swiss mov't on his own for what I assume should be, due the supposedly exactly correlating mov't specifications, a drop-in fit and straight across exchange requiring only proper installation, regulation, and adjustment of the new movement.
One might consider that the Rolex OysterCase watches which started in the 1920s and reached their apex between the end of WWII and the end of the 1970s, became what they are in the mind of the popular culture of the world because they were technologically the best watches of their day while looking the part and not because they were watches that looked good and were comfy on the wrist alone. I personally think Rolex no longer really holds to what they were before the 1980s, but that is no denigration of the, I think, genuinely outstanding and well balanced contemporary engineering they once put into their watches in a wholistic sense so that these watches could better meet any extreme of use required. If that is forgotten or degraded much in designing or redesigning a tool watch, then I personally think it's just a fashion watch whatever its price is or whatever it pretends to be.
* [reference link to photograph of original 1960s Omega SeaMaster300/165.014 Mark XI type internally secured screw-down crystal design using a heavy and coarsely threaded steel retaining ring courtesy TZ-UK member Foggy shown second photo down at his personal website: http://www.freewebs.com/foggy69/omegasm300ref165014.htm ]
** [CTE = Coefficient of Thermal Expansion ]
I can go along with most of Rollon's list of recommendations if they are possible to implement and don't drive up the costs considerably except the following: "a nicely and discreetly incorporated date window".
All too often and in more than most cases, "discreetly" incorporating a date window in a design that didn't already have one ruins the timeless look of the design. And in just about all cases makes the feature look like an afterthought (IMHO). If we are talking about continuing to pay homage to a classic in the new PRS-14 AND one of our objectives is to incorporate a date feature to appease those who put-off buying the watch because of its lack of such feature then we should look to the first official design that incorporated the feature:
As from before:
And even though I personally don't need a date feature on any of my watches and currently own a 14, I would seriously consider buying a new 14 if it was based on the above and having it reside happily along-side my original 14. Again, a timeless classic that makes no bones about the fact it has a date feature.
Dave
+1I can go along with most of Rollon's list of recommendations if they are possible to implement and don't drive up the costs considerably except the following: "a nicely and discreetly incorporated date window".
All too often and in more than most cases, "discreetly" incorporating a date window in a design that didn't already have one ruins the timeless look of the design. And in just about all cases makes the feature look like an afterthought (IMHO). If we are talking about continuing to pay homage to a classic in the new PRS-14 AND one of our objectives is to incorporate a date feature to appease those who put-off buying the watch because of its lack of such feature then we should look to the first official design that incorporated the feature:
As from before:
And even though I personally don't need a date feature on any of my watches and currently own a 14, I would seriously consider buying a new 14 if it was based on the above and having it reside happily along-side my original 14. Again, a timeless classic that makes no bones about the fact it has a date feature.
Dave
Looks like "a nicely and discreetly incorporated date window" to me :D
Actually Dave, I can't argue with a single thing you said and the Omega SM300 you've put up looks absolutely perfect with the date window like that.
I had a PRS-14, and while I loved the size, look, and feel of the watch, I found the lack of a date window annoying over the course of the day. As a result, the watch wasn't getting any wrist time and was sold.
That said, I'm prepared to send Eddie some more of my money for an updated version with the date window; call it the PRS-14D (for date) perhaps. Adding the date window and a sapphire crystal would be the only changes I would request on an already fantastic and functional watch.
Cheers,
Eric
Well, our little referendum ended today. We see that there seems to be an interesting number of potencial buyers of a redesigned PRS-14.
Most of these buyers would like to see a new version of that watch with:
- sapphire crystal;
- Date;
- Bracelet;
- larger crown.
Other features to be considered would be
- slimmer case (while keeping the AM shielding)
- Modified bezel.
Some of the features would certainly mean added cost, but that could be - in theory - seen as aftermarket upgrades, if this assumption has some kind of economical viability.
And, after all that was said, it would be nice to know what Eddie has to say about this and what are his plans.
Eddie allow me
[Eddiemode] NO [/Eddiemode]
:roll:
Sorry but the poll has ended. Regarding this subject I am not interested in the opinions of Eddie´s worshipers or sycophants. I am just an eventual buyer trying to find common ground with the eventual provider. As a polite member of this community I expect a proper reaction/answer.
What I most certainly don´t expect to do is to be asking any kind of favors from anyone: again I say: I am not on the watchmaking business. I am on the buying side.
For whatever it's worth, and assuming it is not a problem legally or otherwise, I'd still like to see a PRS-14 someday made like this,:
and looking like this:I can go along with most of Rollon's list of recommendations if they are possible to implement and don't drive up the costs considerably except the following: "a nicely and discreetly incorporated date window".
All too often and in more than most cases, "discreetly" incorporating a date window in a design that didn't already have one ruins the timeless look of the design. And in just about all cases makes the feature look like an afterthought (IMHO). If we are talking about continuing to pay homage to a classic in the new PRS-14 AND one of our objectives is to incorporate a date feature to appease those who put-off buying the watch because of its lack of such feature then we should look to the first official design that incorporated the feature:
As from before:
And even though I personally don't need a date feature on any of my watches and currently own a 14, I would seriously consider buying a new 14 if it was based on the above and having it reside happily along-side my original 14. Again, a timeless classic that makes no bones about the fact it has a date feature.
Dave
If you had been around during the original design process you would know that Eddie already said no to these requested changes except the ceramic bezel I don't remember that ever being suggested. Also notice the lack of participation by Eddie, I would say he isn't interested in making changes to a finished project (or a sequel) he already rejected.:roll:
Sorry but the poll has ended. Regarding this subject I am not interested in the opinions of Eddie´s worshipers or sycophants. I am just an eventual buyer trying to find common ground with the eventual provider. As a polite member of this community I expect a proper reaction/answer.
What I most certainly don´t expect to do is to be asking any kind of favors from anyone: again I say: I am not on the watchmaking business. I am on the buying side.
Why not a Dial with Date like the Certina PH200M and PH500M dial
Certina DS3 PH500M
http://scubawatch.org/sitebuilder/image ... 70x703.jpg
(credit /scubawatch.org)
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o263 ... TINAS3.jpg
(credit mr2blue" @ WUS )
Certina DS PH200M
(credit salomania @ equationoftime.com & WUS)
Or like the Dial of the EBERHARD SCAFOGRAF 300
(credit gvlwatch.com)
(Credit GVM @ orologi.forumfree.net )
Dynamo
Great watches there, Dynamo! The Eberhard is stunning.
:shock:
But regarding the PRS-14 MKII (or anyother homage): why bother, really?
There is always a way.
Maybe because there is more than plenty of room to make a technologically better watch and it doesn't hurt if it's in a classic style.
I agree completly but it seems that seems to be a lost cause here, regarding this specific model.Maybe because there is more than plenty of room to make a technologically better watch and it doesn't hurt if it's in a classic style.
So be it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
