Edward
Bartender
- Messages
- 25,084
- Location
- London, UK
They were just trying to point out that it's NOT an Aero :lol:
:lol:
Perhaps, given some of the interweb criticism i have seen elsewhere (from the guy himself- "Yes, Virginia, there is a double standard"), they should have named it "Himelnaut" [huh]
You could argue that! Himel were, to my knowledge, the first to revive this particular style (at least in recent years, and outside Japan), though given the age of the design anyone can make a matching jacket - they just can't apply a pre-existing trademark to it. Like anyone can make a Perfecto-type jacket, but they can't call it a Perfecto or even a Schottnaut...
The "Sears" TM is still in use, but the "Hercules" TM obtained by Sears was abandoned many years ago.
A mark being abandoned would be another thing, yes... I'm not aware of any TM regimed which doesn't require a mark to be in good-faith usage as a condition of validity. In that case, they could use "Hercules", but they can't legally use "Sears" in any way, even for the sake of historical accuracy (c/f repros of the original Aero company's A2s, which can't be labelled as Aeros unless by contractual arrangement with Aero in Scotland, or the "Irvin" brand, which can only be used by Aviation Leathercraft, under licence, despite the fact that they make arguably the least accurate Irvins.... several other examples too).
ETA: the picture can be complicated if a TM is not registered in the territory in which another party appropriates and uses it, but there might still be protection for it as an unregistered mark, local laws allowing.