"Homage" or "Fake?"
Where do you draw the line between what is considered to be an "homage" (uses another watch for 'inspiration') and a "fake/replica?"
Personally, I feel like there are a lot of brands that produce fake watches and then market them as an homage in an effort to circumvent any legal action.
Where do you draw the line?
79 comments
Sort by
Xan
I will be documenting the search for my Grail Timepiece on my YouTube channel which will be launching later this year. I also sell watch rolls which are available at GrailTimepieces.com
Cincinnati
Member since
Last active: 3 months ago
That's simple in my opinion. If you make an homage of a submariner but put your own name on it it's an homage. If you write rolex on it it's fake.
Is there any other product that can be blatantly copied and all is perfectly ok if the manufacturer, who invested no time, effort or money in this "homage" design, just puts a different name on it?
Pretty sure if I created an exact replica of an iPhone and just called it an eyeFone or even something unrelated, like "Pagani" maybe, Apple would have me in court before the ink dried.
this happens in the guitar world pretty regularly. There are two basic models that EVERYONE copies - Gibson Les Paul and Fender Stratocaster. There's a million copies of both with just a different name on the headstock or a very minor tweak to keep from being sued.
I personally don't like the practice (with watches & guitars) and refuse to support those companies
If your watch looks a lot like another, fine. If the only difference between your watch, and a fake, is your logo, it’s still a fake.
this happens in the guitar world pretty regularly. There are two basic models that EVERYONE copies - Gibson Les Paul and Fender Stratocaster. There's a million copies of both with just a different name on the headstock or a very minor tweak to keep from being sued.
I personally don't like the practice (with watches & guitars) and refuse to support those companies
Agree on the guitar thing.
That's simple in my opinion. If you make an homage of a submariner but put your own name on it it's an homage. If you write rolex on it it's fake.
Interesting take...I don't think it's quite that simple. So as long as the logo/name has been changed it's an homage?
If your watch looks a lot like another, fine. If the only difference between your watch, and a fake, is your logo, it’s still a fake.
This is spot on IMO.
Is there some sort of timer that goes off and requires us to relitigate this question every few days?
The guitar example is a nice way to expand the argument. But I just can't accept that, after more than 60 years since its introduction, only Gibson should be able to produce Flying V's.
I am not getting drawn into this again. You are all right. It is a shame that Rolex shamelessly rips off Pagani Design.
The name if you have a company called Steve's and make a rolex homage if it has the name Steve's it's good if you call it a rolex it's fake
The Pagani is a homage not because the only change is the logo. There are many differences. The bezel edge is different. The bracelet is different. The movement is certainly different. All those things (except maybe the movement) are more similar than different, admittedly. However, and most importantly, if you wear the Pagani, you aren’t supporting criminals. You also aren’t trying to fake people into thinking you are wearing an actual Rolex. You are buying the Pagani because you like the design but can’t afford or obtain a Submariner. I’m ok with that. I have a Seiko 5 Sea Urchin which I bought specifically due to its similarities to the Sub. It’s the watch that got me into the hobby.
To me, A homage is made by a company who has a direct tie to the original (think Omega and the curent Railmaster)
A watch that borrows very significantly from another brand‘s design is a copy. I don’t distinguish if the design is current or not, and I don’t take issue with this.
A watch that borrows very significantly from another brand‘s design AND uses their name and/or logo is a replica or a fake.
am tired seeing Pagani dragged onto the court of public opinion every thime this comes up. There are a lot of watch companies, not just in China, who produce watches that look a lot like the submariner
hom·age /ˈ(h)ämij/
noun
special honor or respect shown publicly.
Tudor Black Bay Heritage/58 are homage watches. Not sure Pagani Design watches are showing respect to watch makers.
some more:
am tired seeing Pagani dragged onto the court of public opinion every thime this comes up. There are a lot of watch companies, not just in China, who produce watches that look a lot like the submariner
Pagani makes it easy to dislike them...the only thing they do is make bad copies of popular watches.
I don't know wether this argument applies with watches but in the fashion world the desgins are not protected, under patent or other intelectual property laws, because it is much better for the company to pump out the design as quickly as possible to protect their sales from any possible competition (be it leaked designs or designs similar enough). The only thing that is protected is the brand name and logo and copying those is unlawful. And since this is an argument about lawfulness and not moral corrrectness, the companies will do what's legal wether you consider it moral or not, because for enough people either do not care about the morality of this or are willing to turn a blind eye just to get their hands on an iconic design like the Submariner.
It's exactly the same thing. Though, it's not an issue of turning a blind eye, it's because it is difficult to copyright a design.
Processes and instructions, are things that are not copyright-able. For example, I cannot copyright my recipe to make scrambled eggs using two eggs. Similarly, its hard to copyright the application of twelve indexes around a circle, evenly spaced to signify the hours.
Ideas are also not copyright-able. For example, the idea of two star crossed lovers from different warring families, is not a copyright-able concept. Anyone can make up a story and write a book with this premise.
However, specific artistic works that express those ideas are copyright-able. So, the story of Romeo and Juliet as written by Shakespeare was probably copyrightable at one point. But, Romeo and Juliet as written my mike transcribed while drunk around the campfire, unless it takes phrases from Shakespeare's written play, is likely not an infringement on that copyright.
The problem for watch designs, are that they are functional products. They end up being categorized as something between an idea and a functional process. And not as expressions of those ideas and processes into a copyrightable work-unless there are aspects of the watch design are SO unique that maybe they can be... but then, it's only that aspect that can be copyrighted (like Louboutins and their red soles).
It's exactly the same thing. Though, it's not an issue of turning a blind eye, it's because it is difficult to copyright a design.
Processes and instructions, are things that are not copyright-able. For example, I cannot copyright my recipe to make scrambled eggs using two eggs. Similarly, its hard to copyright the application of twelve indexes around a circle, evenly spaced to signify the hours.
Ideas are also not copyright-able. For example, the idea of two star crossed lovers from different warring families, is not a copyright-able concept. Anyone can make up a story and write a book with this premise.
However, specific artistic works that express those ideas are copyright-able. So, the story of Romeo and Juliet as written by Shakespeare was probably copyrightable at one point. But, Romeo and Juliet as written my mike transcribed while drunk around the campfire, unless it takes phrases from Shakespeare's written play, is likely not an infringement on that copyright.
The problem for watch designs, are that they are functional products. They end up being categorized as something between an idea and a functional process. And not as expressions of those ideas and processes into a copyrightable work-unless there are aspects of the watch design are SO unique that maybe they can be... but then, it's only that aspect that can be copyrighted (like Louboutins and their red soles).
Intellectual Property is a real thing and can be protected by law. It's not exactly a patent on the idea, but on the execution of the idea.
We call homage to what is not. It's a direct design copy. There's nothing inherently with that other than us trying to fool ourselves. Homage or tribute is a very different think to what we think.
I think I agree for the most part. Most "homage" watches are rip offs IMO. However, there are certain instances where you can see that a previous design was used as inspiration.
I believe that even though they were both designed by the same man, the Nautilus drew inspiration from the Royal Oak.
I think I agree for the most part. Most "homage" watches are rip offs IMO. However, there are certain instances where you can see that a previous design was used as inspiration.
I believe that even though they were both designed by the same man, the Nautilus drew inspiration from the Royal Oak.
Yes, the thing is that we use the word "homage" as an euphemism when not wanting to admit that we do like the copied designs made by other brand. I call homage to watches of their own that do pay true tribute to other models, like Lorier or Traska due as a matter of fact. Also Tudor or Seiko have some nice homages in their lineup.
Yes, the thing is that we use the word "homage" as an euphemism when not wanting to admit that we do like the copied designs made by other brand. I call homage to watches of their own that do pay true tribute to other models, like Lorier or Traska due as a matter of fact. Also Tudor or Seiko have some nice homages in their lineup.
Not really. Yes, it is a euphemism, and not even a well-chosen one, because nothing in the word suggests that there is a similarity in looks between homaged and homagee. I'm pretty sure the euphemism originated from the watch industry itself, most likely the French-speaking part of Switzerland.
Whatever it is, the word has caught on in watch circles, and lost in these circles the euphemistic characteristic, because everyone knows what you mean: a design clone, for the most part anyway. I would not use the word "homage" to a non-watch person, but I would use it within a forum like this. In particular, I would use it regardless whether I like the original design or not. Splitting the homages into good and bad ones, and only granting the "respectful" ones the word homage is an undertaking I would stay well clear off. The criteria for this division would be murky and one ends up looking like a gate-keeping prick.
Not really. Yes, it is a euphemism, and not even a well-chosen one, because nothing in the word suggests that there is a similarity in looks between homaged and homagee. I'm pretty sure the euphemism originated from the watch industry itself, most likely the French-speaking part of Switzerland.
Whatever it is, the word has caught on in watch circles, and lost in these circles the euphemistic characteristic, because everyone knows what you mean: a design clone, for the most part anyway. I would not use the word "homage" to a non-watch person, but I would use it within a forum like this. In particular, I would use it regardless whether I like the original design or not. Splitting the homages into good and bad ones, and only granting the "respectful" ones the word homage is an undertaking I would stay well clear off. The criteria for this division would be murky and one ends up looking like a gate-keeping prick.
Yes, you're quite right. Still I believe that the distinction between direct design copies and true homages or tributes are to be made and recovered as while in some circumstances it is not that clear, in others is quite easy to spot (i.e. Pagani "Design", Timefactors, Steeldive, etc.). I know this might be only me and a couple more and also that I have personally nothing against those direct design copies as I believe they play an important role in the watch journey, but I've been long trying not to fool myself using euphemisms because I think, at the end, are not a good way to understand the world and our personal relation with it.
Is there any other product that can be blatantly copied and all is perfectly ok if the manufacturer, who invested no time, effort or money in this "homage" design, just puts a different name on it?
Pretty sure if I created an exact replica of an iPhone and just called it an eyeFone or even something unrelated, like "Pagani" maybe, Apple would have me in court before the ink dried.
Like the Omega Speedmaster? Copied directly from a Rodania Geometer which came out 3 years earlier. My point is that all design is derivative.
A “homage” keeps your wife from realizing how many watches you have
Is there any other product that can be blatantly copied and all is perfectly ok if the manufacturer, who invested no time, effort or money in this "homage" design, just puts a different name on it?
Pretty sure if I created an exact replica of an iPhone and just called it an eyeFone or even something unrelated, like "Pagani" maybe, Apple would have me in court before the ink dried.
Guitars
am tired seeing Pagani dragged onto the court of public opinion every thime this comes up. There are a lot of watch companies, not just in China, who produce watches that look a lot like the submariner
This: practically every brand has its Sub tribute and the conversation about Pagani now is exactly the conversation about Invicta like two years ago
Is there any other product that can be blatantly copied and all is perfectly ok if the manufacturer, who invested no time, effort or money in this "homage" design, just puts a different name on it?
Pretty sure if I created an exact replica of an iPhone and just called it an eyeFone or even something unrelated, like "Pagani" maybe, Apple would have me in court before the ink dried.
Yes. Absolutely every piece of clothing.
Is there any other product that can be blatantly copied and all is perfectly ok if the manufacturer, who invested no time, effort or money in this "homage" design, just puts a different name on it?
Pretty sure if I created an exact replica of an iPhone and just called it an eyeFone or even something unrelated, like "Pagani" maybe, Apple would have me in court before the ink dried.
Re: "Is there any other product that can be blatantly copied and all is perfectly ok if the manufacturer, who invested no time, effort or money in this "homage" design, just puts a different name on it"
The fashion industry is rife with examples.
https://www.vox.com/2018/4/27/17281022/fashion-brands-knockoffs-copyright-stolen-designs-old-navy-zara-h-and-m
Pagani makes it easy to dislike them...the only thing they do is make bad copies of popular watches.
That is not really true. Pagani has a few semi-originals, e.g. a vaguely IWC-inspired dress watch that is not a copy of any particular model. And most of their watches are pretty good quality, from what I have heard many times - I don't own a Pagani yet myself.
If bad copies are the bone of your contention then you may want to direct your ire at the brand Bxboxue (yes, I know, it has DQC on the dial, but it is a Bxboxue):
I'm not sure how bad this really is, but you can get it from China for £5, and that includes shipping. You do not get a Pagani for that kind of money.
I'm pretty sure that if Pagani only made "bad copies of popular watches" they would not attract the kind of hostility they do. They irritate the gatekeepers of the rich boys toys club.
That is not really true. Pagani has a few semi-originals, e.g. a vaguely IWC-inspired dress watch that is not a copy of any particular model. And most of their watches are pretty good quality, from what I have heard many times - I don't own a Pagani yet myself.
If bad copies are the bone of your contention then you may want to direct your ire at the brand Bxboxue (yes, I know, it has DQC on the dial, but it is a Bxboxue):
I'm not sure how bad this really is, but you can get it from China for £5, and that includes shipping. You do not get a Pagani for that kind of money.
I'm pretty sure that if Pagani only made "bad copies of popular watches" they would not attract the kind of hostility they do. They irritate the gatekeepers of the rich boys toys club.
Agree to disagree. Pure garbage IMO.
I own a pagani batman Rolex gmt homage and for around $120 it’s a hell of a watch. Good quality, good bracelet, clean markers, good sapphire, decent movement, bezel, solid end links, etc. Obviously I’d prefer the real deal but I can’t afford $10k.