Custom Items in Exchange

[Mervillian]

I've started noticing a trend of custom items with Oakley logos or images being listed in the exchange. Whether they are custom designed posters, glassware, scale vehicles, replicas of pop cards or metal signs etc.

My question is, when does a custom item that is built or commissioned by a member cross the line and become a counterfeit. The fact that these items have been sold surprises and somewhat worries me. While in the cases so far, the original seller has clearly listed them as custom or reproduction, they are now dispersed and owned by many different people. It would be very easy for them to be resold (here or elsewhere) without mention that they are not authentic Oakley (either by accident or otherwise). This contributes to uncertainty for everyone when purchasing items going forward.

Please note that it is not my intention to call out any individuals and in many cases, their work is very well done. I also have no issue with people making custom items for their own display or use, however I believe the forum should prevent the sale of these items as they would counterfeit sunglasses.

I realize that there may be some grey area that would need to be addressed (such as a member taking an authentic Oakley item and modifying or re-purposing it into something unique).

Thoughts?

 

[Ventruck]

Being custom doesn't take away from being authentic, so I'm really not agreeing with the word choice of "counterfeit". It's not like the painter/cutter made their own molds and literally reproduced pairs. Technically speaking, they modified them.

User base, trading profiles, and familiarity with the custom services (usually they'll say who did it) should be reassurance. To me it seems you're thinking a little too over protectively when considering long term consequences. Anyone blowing triple digits on a pair of sunglasses, custom or general release, should be wise enough to research background on the item. This place is pretty quick at recognizing a fake pair or sketchy listing. In these situations, it's really just the seller who struggles because not many people would look for a certain colorway or had done it themselves; and outside of OF, it's a hard sell for anyone to trust, so I fail to believe there's a major concern here for prospective buyers.

Also, the PP G&S rule is something of a cushion.

 

[WavecloudCustoms]

Thoughts - Custom ain't Counterfeit...

 

[OakleyFrankFMJ]

It is a funny line and it's a good thing Oakley LP is all over this place. I'm sure if there were any concerns they would email boss right away anyway.

With that said.

GLWS to anyone trying to get over on the fine people of this forum.

 

[Kuztomized]

Being custom doesn't take away from being authentic, so I'm really not agreeing with the word choice of "counterfeit". It's not like the painter/cutter made their own molds and literally reproduced pairs. Technically speaking, they modified them.

User base, trading profiles, and familiarity with the custom services (usually they'll say who did it) should be reassurance. To me it seems you're thinking a little too over protectively when considering long term consequences. Anyone blowing triple digits on a pair of sunglasses, custom or general release, should be wise enough to research background on the item. This place is pretty quick at recognizing a fake pair or sketchy listing. In these situations, it's really just the seller who struggles because not many people would look for a certain colorway or had done it themselves; and outside of OF, it's a hard sell for anyone to trust, so I fail to believe there's a major concern here for prospective buyers.

Also, the PP G&S rule is something of a cushion.

The way I read the OP - its not talking about taking an Oakley item and customizing it, but rather building something from scratch and putting the O logo on it (whether it mimics a real Oakley product or is something totally original).

 

[bad fishy]

I have always wondered the same. There have been replicas of bunkers, Bob heads, and o logos used on signs and what not. Isn't that similar to the fake oakley shades or watches that we all despise? If someone were to attempt to sell "replica" shades they would immediately be hung by the OF witch hunters.

Custom pieces are entirely different. I think it's obvious when a piece is customized, especially with a little research on O Review. Replicas, not always so obvious....

 

[Ventruck]

The way I read the OP - its not talking about taking an Oakley item and customizing it, but rather building something from scratch and putting the O logo on it (whether it mimics a real Oakley product or is something totally original).

welp, missed that early line in OP.

Part of my post that would carry over is the reliability of our user base. Call it being selective...but basically if such items are moving among users here, there should be mutual understanding of what the product is. When it carries beyond OF, that's really up to the user to be upfront. While I doubt anyone here is pushing custom pieces out as the real things, I just don't have concern about what they do period. Seller can judge the worth at their discretion, and it's really up to the outside buyer to do their research (and yes, that can be harder), If the seller ever got pinned — and sometimes this board will post a thread calling out a fake item being offered elsewhere — they got what was coming.

I guess in short, it's open game with some security. There's resources to research stuff, and the forum is welcome to questioning legitimacy.

 

[kronin323]

Think of it as a matter of legal trademark and copyright.

If it was a product that Oakley actually sold then it's been copyrighted, so copies are counterfeit, even if described as a "replica". Forum rules forbid those. If an OEM product is modified, it's custom and no problem. If you buy a car and put on a customized exhaust and paint job, it's still legally resold, for example.

Display items such as signage, stands, towers, bobs, etc - that's kind of a grey area. Even the authentic items, they were never directly sold to the public, only distributed to stores and licensed resellers for marketing purposes. They were supposed to be returned or destroyed yet found themselves being resold in a "grey market". Technically Oakley could go after sales of those as being stolen goods, but they tolerate it. And why not? Being obsolete, they're of no material value to them, and being redistributed is just free marketing. Really, it'd cost them more to have them returned and / or destroyed, much less the cost of policing the grey market. It's win-win to let it go.

Then a replica of those display items, they likely were not copyrighted, so they can't be gone after strictly on that basis. The same applies to designing and building something new from scratch. But, if they contain a trademarked logo, then they could go after them, if they so choose.

Even then there's some grey area, though. If you're manufacturing the logo along with the item, that's most clearly a trademark violation. But what if you were taking an OEM-produced-and-sold icon sticky and putting it on the creation, it that a trademark violation? Possibly, but arguably not - if you bought an icon sticky from the O-store and went home and put it on your refrigerator, then later sold the refrigerator with the icon still on it, there's nothing illegal about that. Or a publicly visible building that happens to have a logo on it, selling a replica or picture of that building, that's just art...

So yes, building something from scratch and putting a copy of the "O" logo on it could be risky, but it's not always black-and-white. I know that the mods do pay attention to that and may contact a seller if they have a concern, but really it's the seller that takes the risk; the forum itself only exposes itself to liability if Oakley officially requests a copyright or trademark violation be taken down and the mods do not act.

 

[bad fishy]

Think of it as a matter of legal trademark and copyright.

If it was a product that Oakley actually sold then it's been copyrighted, so copies are counterfeit, even if described as a "replica". Forum rules forbid those. If an OEM product is modified, it's custom and no problem. If you buy a car and put on a customized exhaust and paint job, it's still legally resold, for example.

Display items such as signage, stands, towers, bobs, etc - that's kind of a grey area. Even the authentic items, they were never directly sold to the public, only distributed to stores and licensed resellers for marketing purposes. They were supposed to be returned or destroyed yet found themselves being resold in a "grey market". Technically Oakley could go after sales of those as being stolen goods, but they tolerate it. And why not? Being obsolete, they're of no material value to them, and being redistributed is just free marketing. Really, it'd cost them more to have them returned and / or destroyed, much less the cost of policing the grey market. It's win-win to let it go.

Then a replica of those display items, they likely were not copyrighted, so they can't be gone after strictly on that basis. The same applies to designing and building something new from scratch. But, if they contain a trademarked logo, then they could go after them, if they so choose.

Even then there's some grey area, though. If you're manufacturing the logo along with the item, that's most clearly a trademark violation. But what if you were taking an OEM-produced-and-sold icon sticky and putting it on the creation, it that a trademark violation? Possibly, but arguably not - if you bought an icon sticky from the O-store and went home and put it on your refrigerator, then later sold the refrigerator with the icon still on it, there's nothing illegal about that. Or a publicly visible building that happens to have a logo on it, selling a replica or picture of that building, that's just art...

So yes, building something from scratch and putting a copy of the "O" logo on it could be risky, but it's not always black-and-white. I know that the mods do pay attention to that and may contact a seller if they have a concern, but really it's the seller that takes the risk; the forum itself only exposes itself to liability if Oakley officially requests a copyright violation be taken down and they do not act.

Great explanation!

 

[Mervillian]

Think of it as a matter of legal trademark and copyright.

If it was a product that Oakley actually sold then it's been copyrighted, so copies are counterfeit, even if described as a "replica". Forum rules forbid those. If an OEM product is modified, it's custom and no problem. If you buy a car and put on a customized exhaust and paint job, it's still legally resold, for example.

Display items such as signage, stands, towers, bobs, etc - that's kind of a grey area. Even the authentic items, they were never directly sold to the public, only distributed to stores and licensed resellers for marketing purposes. They were supposed to be returned or destroyed yet found themselves being resold in a "grey market". Technically Oakley could go after sales of those as being stolen goods, but they tolerate it. And why not? Being obsolete, they're of no material value to them, and being redistributed is just free marketing. Really, it'd cost them more to have them returned and / or destroyed, much less the cost of policing the grey market. It's win-win to let it go.

Then a replica of those display items, they likely were not copyrighted, so they can't be gone after strictly on that basis. The same applies to designing and building something new from scratch. But, if they contain a trademarked logo, then they could go after them, if they so choose.

Even then there's some grey area, though. If you're manufacturing the logo along with the item, that's most clearly a trademark violation. But what if you were taking an OEM-produced-and-sold icon sticky and putting it on the creation, it that a trademark violation? Possibly, but arguably not - if you bought an icon sticky from the O-store and went home and put it on your refrigerator, then later sold the refrigerator with the icon still on it, there's nothing illegal about that. Or a publicly visible building that happens to have a logo on it, selling a replica or picture of that building, that's just art...

So yes, building something from scratch and putting a copy of the "O" logo on it could be risky, but it's not always black-and-white. I know that the mods do pay attention to that and may contact a seller if they have a concern, but really it's the seller that takes the risk; the forum itself only exposes itself to liability if Oakley officially requests a copyright or trademark violation be taken down and the mods do not act.

Thank you for your post. I think you explained my points better than I could. I understand that is likely too small for Oakley to worry about and why piss of valued customers for no gain (insert negative Lux comment here). But as a collector of all things Oakley (not just shades), I am concerned that the more "replica" items (built from scratch without permission to use the logo) that are in the marketplace, the more likely I am, or another member is, to unknowingly purchasing a non-authentic item. And this forum is providing a gateway for these items to enter the market (despite rules stated in the contrary). So far it hasn't become the biggest of issues, but it might be good to get ahead of it before it does and be consistent rather than wait for someone to get items made in bulk to sell here.