Doxa is in real trouble

[JP Chestnut]

I would consider homages to watches currently in production basically stealing.
If a watch is no longer made, then copy away. Same as with any product. Whole product lines have been destroyed by cheap copies.

Contrarians might say that Doxa is a homage of Doxa. Doxa shut down in 1980 (according to wikipedia). The Jenny family acquired the name in 1997. Then they paid a manufacturer in China to make the old watches again.

It's not the same people, or the same equipment, or the same company as the original. The Jenny family didn't design the watches or add intellectual property.

I would certainly never wear a homage to any Rolex, Omega, etc. (their designs and their intellectual property), but I'm not sure I'd care so much about the Jennys.

I mean, you can look at a lot of watch brands in that way if you really want to.
Breitling isn’t the same company from when it started either.

The factory was shut down in 1978, the name was bought in 79. In 2017 and 2018 it was sold to CVC Capital Partners, an American Investment Firm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Panerai and Lange are the same story. They’re new brands with a coopted history. Very few brands have either (1) operated continuously since founding.

[Ryeguy]

Regarding these Maranez watches (not the handful of others I have no experience with) only a Doxa expert would recognize the differences in the Maranez case and a modern Doxa case.

Apparently (and I am no Doxa expert by any means) the Maranez case is a copy of the older Doxa Sub model. This is why the end links of the Maranez bracelet don’t fit on the Doxa Sub watch case. I forget the specifics, but one case is slightly thicker than the other.

That said, it illustrates Doxa’s challenge. You could argue Maranez is actually producing a homage to an out of production design, but in reality, it looks damn close to what Doxa is selling today. There has been such minimal evolution to the Doxa Sub models over the years.

Heck, you could buy a Maranez copy of a Doxa 300T, but with a Ti case and bracelet (as never done by Doxa), in a dial color never produced by Doxa, with a case design that is long out of production. Even with all these significant differences, people will still think it’s a Doxa.

[gwells]

to me, whether it's a copy or homage comes down to whether they essentially took the original and made some minor adaptations to it to brand it as your own (i think maranez as described by Chris fits that description, just changing material, logo, dial color) [i.e., essentially copying] vs whether they looked at something already done and used elements of that watch to inspire your design, where you can see those elements but also see other elements that make it your own [homage].

[Ryeguy]

to me, whether it's a copy or homage comes down to whether they essentially took the original and made some minor adaptations to it to brand it as your own (i think maranez as described by Chris fits that description, just changing material, logo, dial color) [i.e., essentially copying] vs whether they looked at something already done and used elements of that watch to inspire your design, where you can see those elements but also see other elements that make it your own [homage].

I tend to agree, but I am also trying to give Maranez some credit for using Ti. I think it is interesting that Maranez is advancing the ball a bit from an engineering perspective where Doxa seems to prefer to let it stay. It is a copy that is trying to be different, if that makes sense.

I mean there is absolutely zero parts interchangeability between the Maranez and the Doxa, but when you look at a Maranez, you think "Doxa copy".

To me, the defining style element of a Doxa Sub is the "no decompression" timing bezel (although the patent on it has long expired). I actually prefer the old Maranez bezel (the one I bought) that had the elapsed time / 12 hour scale. It at least provided a bit more differentiation and didn't copy this brand-specific design element.

[dnslater]

I would consider homages to watches currently in production basically stealing.
If a watch is no longer made, then copy away. Same as with any product. Whole product lines have been destroyed by cheap copies.

Contrarians might say that Doxa is a homage of Doxa. Doxa shut down in 1980 (according to wikipedia). The Jenny family acquired the name in 1997. Then they paid a manufacturer in China to make the old watches again.

It's not the same people, or the same equipment, or the same company as the original. The Jenny family didn't design the watches or add intellectual property.

I would certainly never wear a homage to any Rolex, Omega, etc. (their designs and their intellectual property), but I'm not sure I'd care so much about the Jennys.

I mean, you can look at a lot of watch brands in that way if you really want to.
Breitling isn’t the same company from when it started either.

The factory was shut down in 1978, the name was bought in 79. In 2017 and 2018 it was sold to CVC Capital Partners, an American Investment Firm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Panerai and Lange are the same story. They’re new brands with a coopted history. Very few brands have either (1) operated continuously since founding.

Not to mention Hamilton, Blancpain and even Omega. Omega has been manufactured continuously, although Swatch shifted production to their own facility when they bought the company. Blancpain and Hamilton were essentially just brand names that were out of production, and the names purchased.

The Jenny family (and Swatch Group) invested their own money to purchase the Intellectual property and start back up R&D and production, which is a big difference from someone like Seestern who is simply ripping off the design that Doxa re-released with no financial outlay, and farming production to Asia.

Fer crissakes Seestern just sits back and waits until a company has a successful release, and then copies it and releases their own. They are even doing Seiko and Grand Seiko.

[Wario406]

Seestern is really a very scummy company that makes really great knock-off’s. Blatantly ripping off someone’s IP is not cool. The 300T rip-off I had was an exceptional piece of manufacturing with really nice machine work, solid lug bracelet, clear crystal, and nicely painted face. And for $200 it was a stupid good value if you don’t have issues wearing a watch that’s a known clone of a much more expensive watch. And, it’ll probably last as long as a Doxa too.

I love having my originals (Omega, Doxa, Marathon, etc), and love my unique micro brands (Alkin, KarlsKrona, Ares) and am willing to pay for them to keep my conscience happy. But, my conscience is my issue and staying true to what I believe is right is what helps me to sleep well - the beauty of this hobby is that everyone has different sleep habits.






Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Ryeguy]

I think a lot of it is just our unique (maybe abnormal) passion for watches.

When I go to the shooting range, I never hear anyone bash someone's Ruger, Kimber, or Springfield Armory 1911 clone because they didn't buy a Colt.

Heck, I lug around one of these and no one seems to care it wasn't made by Walther.


If you are violating a patent, I have no sympathy. If you are making a replica, I have no sympathy.

If you are copying a "look" or style and only bring "cheaper than the original" to the table, then I'm probably not interested. It isn't illegal, but 9 times out of 10 I'll want the real thing.

If, however, you offer the style of the original, but have advanced the ball with either design or material enhancements to make it "better", then the line gets fuzzy in my mind.

I respect we all have different opinions on this topic. All good.

[toxicavenger]

I would have expected a more negative perspective on Doxa homages from such an enthusiast, but it's been quite the opposite.

That's not saying much when the guy was actually having replica parts made for vintage Doxa's.

He seems to like hating on Doxa since the basement dudes got sent packing.

I don’t know the details of the replica parts scenario, but I have a hard time faulting a guy if he’s doing this to bring back some non-working vintage watch with impossible to find replacement parts.

I think someone could find some issue with his “IrishStar” dial as it has a Doxa logo and is clearly not a Doxa part. That said, he did it for himself and isn’t out there selling “IrishStar” dials to the public.

When these replica dial watches are being sold as an original watch it is BS.

Same management runs Doxa as before. The difference is now there are no middlemen to convolut the water.

Doxa should ban him because of the fake Irish dial.

[gwells]

If, however, you offer the style of the original, but have advanced the ball with either design or material enhancements to make it "better", then the line gets fuzzy in my mind.

I respect we all have different opinions on this topic. All good.

i draw the line if you only make material enhancements. at that point, you're still stealing the design. if you use the design as inspiration and create something different, but similar enough you can see the inspiration, that's different. if it's essentially a straight design copy with a different material or dial color, as a creative by trade, i very much dislike that. i'm fine if you use my design to inspire derivative work. i'm not so fine if you just take my design.

[toxicavenger]

If, however, you offer the style of the original, but have advanced the ball with either design or material enhancements to make it "better", then the line gets fuzzy in my mind.

I respect we all have different opinions on this topic. All good.

i draw the line if you only make material enhancements. at that point, you're still stealing the design. if you use the design as inspiration and create something different, but similar enough you can see the inspiration, that's different. if it's essentially a straight design copy with a different material or dial color, as a creative by trade, i very much dislike that. i'm fine if you use my design to inspire derivative work. i'm not so fine if you just take my design.

If they really wanted to "advance the ball" they should invest in their own design.

[andrema]

Anyone looking for a vintage Isofrane? I just found an extra one in one of my boxes.

[gonzomantis]

Here’s an example. When Noah Fuller put out the Tsunami, there wasn’t a turdle in the Seiko lineup.

Homage?
Copy?
Legit effort to offer something no longer available?

[Ryeguy]

If, however, you offer the style of the original, but have advanced the ball with either design or material enhancements to make it "better", then the line gets fuzzy in my mind.

I respect we all have different opinions on this topic. All good.

i draw the line if you only make material enhancements. at that point, you're still stealing the design. if you use the design as inspiration and create something different, but similar enough you can see the inspiration, that's different. if it's essentially a straight design copy with a different material or dial color, as a creative by trade, i very much dislike that. i'm fine if you use my design to inspire derivative work. i'm not so fine if you just take my design.

It's all good and I think people who come from a creative background also have stronger feelings on the subject.

From an academic perspective, with no enforceable patents and no original designer left alive, is there ever an acceptable clone?

Its just a curious point for me because I would have no issue owning a Kimber 1911 clone and I do own a Sig P320 Walther PPK "homage" / clone, but I find the Seastern pretty distasteful.

Arguably, there is no difference between what Kimber, Ruger, etc. are doing to Colt to what Maranez (et al.) are doing to Doxa.

[Ryeguy]

If, however, you offer the style of the original, but have advanced the ball with either design or material enhancements to make it "better", then the line gets fuzzy in my mind.

I respect we all have different opinions on this topic. All good.

i draw the line if you only make material enhancements. at that point, you're still stealing the design. if you use the design as inspiration and create something different, but similar enough you can see the inspiration, that's different. if it's essentially a straight design copy with a different material or dial color, as a creative by trade, i very much dislike that. i'm fine if you use my design to inspire derivative work. i'm not so fine if you just take my design.

If they really wanted to "advance the ball" they should invest in their own design.

How much different would it need to be in order to be OK? After all we are talking about a 3 hand, cushion case, watch.

If they used Ti for the case, used a dial with applied indices, and used a bezel that didn't have a "no deco" scale, would that be OK?

I'm not trying to defend anyone, I just find the topic interesting because I find my personal feelings on the topic really depend upon subject matter.

[Ryeguy]

I would have expected a more negative perspective on Doxa homages from such an enthusiast, but it's been quite the opposite.

That's not saying much when the guy was actually having replica parts made for vintage Doxa's.

He seems to like hating on Doxa since the basement dudes got sent packing.

I don’t know the details of the replica parts scenario, but I have a hard time faulting a guy if he’s doing this to bring back some non-working vintage watch with impossible to find replacement parts.

I think someone could find some issue with his “IrishStar” dial as it has a Doxa logo and is clearly not a Doxa part. That said, he did it for himself and isn’t out there selling “IrishStar” dials to the public.

When these replica dial watches are being sold as an original watch it is BS.

Same management runs Doxa as before. The difference is now there are no middlemen to convolut the water.

Doxa should ban him because of the fake Irish dial.

I've not heard of FlyingDoctor selling "franken" Doxa's as all original. This is news to me.

I don't think he is selling that "IrishStar" dial. I was under the impression he made just the one for himself.

I think banning a guy for making a custom dial for personal use is pretty harsh, but that's just my opinion.

[andrema]

Anyone looking for a vintage Isofrane? I just found an extra one in one of my boxes.

[gwells]

How much different would it need to be in order to be OK? After all we are talking about a 3 hand, cushion case, watch.

If they used Ti for the case, used a dial with applied indices, and used a bezel that didn't have a "no deco" scale, would that be OK?

well, that's the rub. there's not a hard line, whether legally or morally. and everyone's line will be a little different.

my personal view: if i look at a watch and, if you just swapped the "inspiration" brand logo onto the "homage" watch dial, would you know at a glance that it wasn't the "insiration" watch? if you have to look closely for details to figure out it's not really a doxa but a maranez, then i'd say maranez is copying, not using doxa as an inspiration for an homage.

[tattoo chef]

I mean, parts may not be interchangeable as they are slightly off in dimensions or tolerances etc, but there’s no doubt they are all copies. They look more like a Doxa than a Steinhart looks like Rolex for example.
Irreantum back in the day was the first to copy Doxa, but at least they changed it up so it didn’t look the same if you put them side by side.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Jeep99dad]

I have this one brand new if someone wants to give it a go and save some $. Dm me

[Ryeguy]

^^^ You bought a Ti one?

I thought you bought one of the stainless Samui / Doxa 300 look-a-like models to try out the bracelet.

[Ryeguy]

I mean, parts may not be interchangeable as they are slightly off in dimensions or tolerances etc, but there’s no doubt they are all copies. They look more like a Doxa than a Steinhart looks like Rolex for example.
Irreantum back in the day was the first to copy Doxa, but at least they changed it up so it didn’t look the same if you put them side by side.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I know those were made ages ago, but they look more Squale 101ATMOS to me than Doxa.




Your point is well taken though - at a glance it is not going to be mistaken for either a Doxa or a Squale.

[Jeep99dad]

^^^ You bought a Ti one?

I thought you bought one of the stainless Samui / Doxa 300 look-a-like models to try out the bracelet.

No. I’m an idiot. Picked up the wrong pic gro their site. So many darn models didn’t even know they made them in TI my bad.
Mine is SS

[aikiman44]

Even though companies may not be the original manufacturers, they pay dearly for licensing. Therefore their designs should be protected.

[Wario406]

Anyone looking for a vintage Isofrane? I just found an extra one in one of my boxes.

Dibs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Ryeguy]

Even though companies may not be the original manufacturers, they pay dearly for licensing. Therefore their designs should be protected.

Are you speaking legally or morally?

I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't a design patent run something like 14 years? I also don't believe they are renewable.

I don't think any of the designs we are discussing are less than 50 years old.

The moral argument I make is "if the design owner is still making money off the design, it is distasteful to copy it".

I just surprise myself how I kinda see this only applying to watches, and I seem to have heightened sensitivity to it when it involves a watch I actually own (such as my SLA017). I've bought store brand products before - aren't they just as bad from a moral standpoint?

Maybe it is a little guy thing, such as a Doxa clone hurts Doxa more than a Seiko clone hurts Seiko, but that isn't fair either.

This self realization somewhat undermines any moral high ground position I might consider taking, so I'm not taking one.