Rolex Trademarks - Hints for 2020?

[Alan111]

Just looking up some recent Rolex filings. Pretty interesting results. Looks like they applied (reapplied) for:

MILSUB:



DYNACHROM:



OYSTERQUARTZ:



PERPETUAL SPIRIT:





Dynachrom seems interesting...

[Junior_]

Oysterquartz make me shudder.

[Rashid.bk]

Oysterquartz, that can only make me think of a Rolex smartwatch in todays times. Dynachrom sounds like a new hairspring material or according to this filing information something to do with a precious metal. "Chrom" means color for Rolex, Dyna could imply a lot, since looking at other Rolex names, I would never have guessed Rolesor to mean two tone. As such, the patent filing has been abandoned, but I don't know how patent laws work so that could mean nothing. Definitely a good topic for discussion.

https://trademarks.justia.com/872/29...-87229449.html

And then MILSUB...that makes me weak in the knees thinking about what it could mean. But I think Grady called it, it's probably just to protect the name, to possibly prevent future usage and to prevent literature associations by others since the name MILSUB in the watch world can only be talking about a bad ass Submariner that everyone wants.
I'm going to just go ahead and get on the list at my AD.........nothing better to do.

[foo4rolex]

All are from Rolex USA.
How about other countries? Do they need to apply for trademarks too?!

[foo4rolex]

MILSUB means military submariner or the combination of Milgauss and Submariner?

[3sheets86]

MILSUB is alright for a genuine ex-military sub but not a mass produced one for civilians to buy from an AD. It's almost as tacky as a 007 Omega.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by foo4rolex

MILSUB means military submariner or the combination of Milgauss and Submariner?

MILSUB=Milgauss Submariner....said by no one, ever.

[foo4rolex]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

MILSUB=Milgauss Submariner....said by no one, ever.

Am I the first one who mentioned that?

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by 3sheets86

MILSUB is alright for a genuine ex-military sub but not a mass produced one for civilians to buy from an AD. It's almost as tacky as a 007 Omega.

Disagree, the Milsub by Rolex was a watch made with specifications for the military. it didn't say mil sub or anything military on the dial. The key high lights were it had more lume and a cheaper inexpensive nylon band with fixed spring bars for durability. That's pretty much it.

Saying that a civilian would look tacky with a modern version is akin to saying the same about pilot watches, dive watches or even the Yachtmaster. All watches made with specifications for a specific working career field. Hell, that would mean that even a BLRO would be tacky, since that was specifically made for airline pilots.

The Omega Bond watches cannot be compared to this, it's not the same thing. The same thing is the standard Omega watch, like the Speedmaster, specifically made for astronauts, the Seamaster Diver 300 or the Ploprof. Those aren't tacky, heck while that crazy platinum 007 Seamaster Diver priced at $58k is ridiculous and tacky, the standard watches aren't and I don't think the new Diver in titanium is either and definitely not a modern MILSUB(that I doubt we'll ever see anyway).

[3sheets86]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

Disagree, the Milsub by Rolex was a watch made with specifications for the military. it didn't say mil sub or anything military on the dial. The key high lights were it had more lume and a cheaper inexpensive nylon band with fixed spring bars for durability. That's pretty much it.

Saying that a civilian would look tacky with a modern version is akin to saying the same about pilot watches, dive watches or even the Yachtmaster. All watches made with specifications for a specific working career field. Hell, that would mean that even a BLRO would be tacky, since that was specifically made for airline pilots.

The Omega Bond watches cannot be compared to this, it's not the same thing. The same thing is the standard Omega watch, like the Speedmaster, specifically made for astronauts, the Seamaster Diver 300 or the Ploprof. Those aren't tacky, heck while that crazy platinum 007 Seamaster Diver priced at $58k is ridiculous and tacky, the standard watches aren't and I don't think the new Diver in titanium is either and definitely not a modern MILSUB(that I doubt we'll ever see anyway).

I disagree.

[Yess]

Originally Posted by foo4rolex

Am I the first one who mentioned that?

He/she means you shouldn't mention that. Not that you're the first although you could be

[HogwldFLTR]

OysterQuarts

[ExpensiveLabels]

When the 2020 versions of a particular watch are released, what does Rolex do with the older year models?

[M45]

Nothing says retail cancer more than a “tribute” military watch that is in no way, shape, or form faithful to the original design.

[77T]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

OysterQuarts

They missed that one


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[77T]

Originally Posted by Alan111

Just looking up some recent Rolex filings.

Routine renewals. Trademarks are renewed every 10 years usually. Renewal periods can differ depending on the country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Flyfisher]

They should trademark

MTCase

[Bladeshot]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

OysterQuarts

Oh, Man!!!

[DCheeta]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

OysterQuarts

Pure genius!

[chinguel]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

OysterQuarts

[chinguel]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

OysterQuarts

Best NEWS IN 16 or 17 YEARS.

[ThatSubGuy]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

like the Speedmaster, specifically made for astronauts

As far as I know Astronauts chose the Speedmaster for it's chronograph capabilities and the fact that the movement was handwound. At the time they didn't believe an automatic movement would self-wind in space (it would).

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by ThatSubGuy

As far as I know Astronauts chose the Speedmaster for it's chronograph capabilities and the fact that the movement was handwound. At the time they didn't believe an automatic movement would self-wind in space (it would).

Not true.

The reason NASA chose a hand-wound chronograph is a very simple one. Automatic chronographs didn't come to market until 1969

[chinguel]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

Not true.

The reason NASA chose a hand-wound chronograph is a very simple one. Automatic chronographs didn't come to market until 1969

I believe you.
But we all know that military or any kind of special forces need the BEST OF THE BEST no matter in house or anywhere in the world.