If this were an issue involving Replica Rado watches where millions of units are made, then it would have been a more practical legal battle.I last want to say that if this case occurred in the US, applying US law, I don't think the case would have lasted quite that long. European laws tend to be more protective of intellectual property when it comes to art (and watch design falls into that). In the US, really only copyright or trademark law could have applied. The use of screws on dials, and frames around subdials has been done before, and frequently. So have overlapping subdials. Thus, I feel that at least in the US, FP Journe would have had a really hard time finding an issue that contained a true question of the law in this regard in the first place - let alone a 5 year long legal battle. Which again, is why you so infrequently see cases like this.For more information see smaller articles on this case (in French) at these two places on Business Montres and World Tempus. Plus the appeals court decision PDF via World Tempus.
Having had a difficult time dealing with FP Journe myself, I can easily see why they might get overly zealous in a situation like this. Plus, it is well known in the Replica Rado watches industry that the Swatch Group is very hard headed and won't stand down from a (real or potential) fight. Further still, I believe it is a matter of pride for the watch makers and executives involved. They hate having their ideas stripped as they feel a deep sense of ownership over those Replica Rado watches they release. All the watches involved here are high-end to very high-end. So the pool of people that would even be consumers or know what the watches here are is small.
