Regular readers will recall that the Swatch Group – which owns the Hamilton brand – lost their trademark infringement lawsuit against Vortic, makers of “up-cycled” wristwatches. Vortic is back to selling modified Hamilton pocket watches and Swatch was back in court defending itself against F1 driver Lewis Hamilton, of all people. This time Swatch won. Talk about a no-brainer . . .
After a three year legal battle, the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) threw out a cancellation application against the Hamilton Watch Company by Mercedes’ main man. Lewis Hamilton the driver sued Hamilton the watchmaker to stop Hamilton the watchmaker from trademarking the name “Hamilton” in Europe.
Given that Hamilton has been selling Hamilton watches since 1892 (albeit switching to Swiss ownership in 1972), the fact that the F1 stud’s application to the EU Court managed to survive this long is beyond imagination. But not beyond money, obviously.
Lewis Hamilton is worth some $285m. But not forever, if his handlers enable this is the kind of legal and financial stupidity. From a PR point-of-view, you’d think that his official watch sponsor, IWC, would have moved metaphorical mountains to strangle their “ambassador’s” legal action in its crib. Which they probably did. To no avail.
“The contested mark consists solely of one word ‘HAMILTON’, and not ‘LEWIS HAMILTON’,” the court ruled. “It is a rather common surname in English-speaking countries . . . There is no ‘natural right’ for a person to have his or her own name registered as a trademark, when that would infringe third parties’ rights.”
What’s more, “Even the cancellation applicant explicitly accepted that the contested mark ‘HAMILTON’ had been used since 1892, i.e. even before the date of birth of ‘Lewis Hamilton’ as a natural person.” Ninety-three years before the Hertfordshire-born driver left his mother’s birth canal.
Where did Lewis Hamilton come up with this cockamamie filing in the first place? When Lucille Ball sued the Ball Watch Company? Oh wait . . .
The Court’s ruling won’t ding Mr. Hamilton’s racing career. One wonders more about the Hamilton Watch Company’s future. Under Swatch’s stewardship, Hamilton has been making its money selling retro-style mechanical timepieces for under a grand – the exact market where the smartwatch is kicking all kinds of ass. The next gen can’t even read an analogue watch.
The recently released Hamilton PSR – an LED watch harkening back to the boom-and-bust ’70’s timepiece that ended Hamilton’s American adventure – could well be a horological harbinger of doom. In other words, Hamilton may have won the battle – protecting the exclusive right to make Hamilton-branded products – but they look set to lose the war.
Hamilton is a weird brand. I love my vintage L.L. Bean Hamilton 33mm 9219 field watch, but when it bites the dust, I’d rather buy a cheap Timex field watch. Paying $300 for a brand new 40mm Hamilton field watch defeats the purpose of the shabby chic ethic, at least as applied to a field watch.
I don’t really follow F1, but wow… I know Hamilton is a talented driver, but I didn’t realize he was that stupid. He must have paid his lawyers a huge retainer, so they could ignore what anyone with a modicum of knowledge about trademarks (raises his hand) would have quickly pointed out. First use usually wins that game. Similarly, you can’t trademark common words. What a dolt.
Nah, you’re the stupid one. Didn’t cost him a penny. 99% of the world knows Lewis Hamilton. Hamilton watches are known by incel virgins like yourself.
That’s a pretty funny joke. Not about Hamilton watches, as I’d have to actually meet someone who knows they exist (and are now Swiss) to know about that. But do you know any women? You’re telling me that the majority of women know who … hold on, gotta see how his name is spelt…(hahaha, check the url, nobody even cares how his first name is spelled) Hamilton the [F1? Indycar?] driver is? You know of a workplace where people chat about [again, whatever branch of open wheel racing that gets poor viewership he does]? In what world do you live? Maybe it’s like that in parts of Europe or South America? That ain’t 99% of global population by any stretch.
That anonymous comment was obviously some 12 year old child. Not even worth commenting on.
Yes, this is really stupid on the part of Mr. Hamilton, but you guys need to do some proofreading on yapper articles before posting. It’s Lewis, not Louis!
Yeah senior moment. Fixed!
So while embracing BLM and striving to become the point man in Europe for social change while playing up his own personal “victimhood” Mr. Hamilton was demanding a 120 year old company pay for daring to have the same name as him. It’s good to know my disdain for him is not without merit.
Do you have an argument? Why am I even asking? Ad hominems prove that you do not, that you are emotional and have no rebuttal to provable facts.
I don’t think he was trying to make an argument nor was there an argument to refute? It was just a statement. Lewis does play the same tune as all the leftists in the US and west. BLM was a corrupt scam exploiting the hearts of those who strive to perceive the world in either oppressed or oppressor and traits over character. BLM is now a metaphor of the ruin that identity politics and leftist woke social justice play in a greater cultural diverse society. This ideology indirectly forces Lewis to perceive himself as a victim, leaving him only the melanin content of his skin as the identity trait which to prove his oppression. And even then, instead of appreciating and affirming the VAST progress those that lived 100 years ago could only dream of, leftists must only focus on the extreme minority of ***ists left and portray them as a fictional majority. When you are in search of deep personal meaning in life, you may look to join the fight of historical hero’s, even after they succeeded. Which will ironically start to slow or even reverse the success. Because the world will always have some amount of ***ists, who themselves see the world through the lens of identity politics and individual traits instead of character. To achieve “equal outcome” for instance, you MUST discriminate dishonestly and unevenly against another innocent group of peoples. Stay true to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., for judging people by the content of their character, not by some innate trait.
Your not yapper. Darned autocorrect. Guess that proofreading rule applies to commenters, too!
What a complete Mug it sums him up
Unfortunate news for my potential lawsuit against Timex for infringing on my username.
“Under Swatch’s stewardship, Hamilton has been making its money selling retro-style mechanical timepieces for under a grand – the exact market where the smartwatch is kicking all kinds of ass.”
The bought and paid for watch media has been spreading the idea, championed by the Swiss watch industry, that because of smart watches mechanical watches have to cost $1,000+. The Swiss watch industry has used that logic to arbitrarily increase the price of watches that have no business costing more than $1,000. But it does not hold water. If smart watches reduce the wrist time that mechanical watches get that is going to hurt a $5,000 mechanical watch more than at $500 mechanical watch. The less wear time a watch gets, the less value it provides, the less it has to cost.
The reason that the sub-$1,000 Swiss watch category has been hit the hardest is that most of those watches are not mechanical watches, they are dumb quartz watches that have no purpose or value in the smart quartz watch era. What the Swiss need to stay relevant is more sub-$1,000 mechanical watches.
“Hamilton may have won the war – but they look set to lose the war.” You mean, won the BATTLE but lost the WAR.
D’oh!
Great article on the legal battle between Lewis Hamilton and Hamilton Watch Company! It’s fascinating to see how trademark disputes can play out in the world of sports and fashion. I appreciate the clear and concise breakdown of the issue and the implications it may have for both parties. Looking forward to reading more content like this on your blog!
yea true