Due to a complaint by ESSILORS trade mark lawyers

[Chris Ryser]

Due to a complaint by ESSILORS trade mark lawyers received this morning:

........stating ..........that the use of the name "Crystal Clear Guard" is likely to cause consumer confusion or mistake by creating the perception that OMS (and/or its products) is related,affiliated with, or sponsored by ESSILOR.

Accordingly, we insist that OMS immediately cease and desist from any and all uses of "CRYSTAL CLEAR GUARD" including removing all references to "CRYSTAL CLEAR GUARD" on it's company website. Our client also request's confirmation that other materials in OMS inventory using "CRYSTAL CLEAR GUARD" are no longer distributed.


therefore we have decided to change the of the product to something that has NO relations to ESSILOR neither in name or in relation to their treade mark products.

The above offered product has a new name as of today, and is definitely NOT related in any way to ANY Essilor products.

It is being sold as:

OMS "Diamond Slick Coat" slick coat for AR coated lenses.
All details can be seen at http://optochemicals.com

[rsandr]

Due to a complaint by ESSILORS trade mark lawyers received this morning:

........stating ..........that the use of the name "Crystal Clear Guard" is likely to cause consumer confusion or mistake by creating the perception that OMS (and/or its products) is related,affiliated with, or sponsored by ESSILOR.

Accordingly, we insist that OMS immediately cease and desist from any and all uses of "CRYSTAL CLEAR GUARD" including removing all references to "CRYSTAL CLEAR GUARD" on it's company website. Our client also request's confirmation that other materials in OMS inventory using "CRYSTAL CLEAR GUARD" are no longer distributed.


therefore we have decided to change the of the product to something that has NO relations to ESSILOR neither in name or in relation to their treade mark products.

The above offered product has a new name as of today, and is definitely NOT related in any way to ANY Essilor products.

It is being sold as:

OMS "Diamond Slick Coat" slick coat for AR coated lenses.
All details can be seen at http://optochemicals.com

What Essilor product did they think it sounded like?

[Mikef]

Could it be this?




ESSILOR OF AMERICA’S CRIZAL® ALIZE™ MAKES AR LENSES CRYSTAL CLEAR AND EASY TO CLEAN. Crizal Alizé uses a thin layer of perfluorinated-polymer molecules to fill and smooth the microscopic pores on the lens surface. This layer helps resist dirt and smudges, thereby keeping lenses clean. Clarity and durability are achieved as the Crizal lens technology is combined with hydrophobic benefits. The topcoat offers scratch resistance and is anti-reflective. For more information, contact Essilor of America at 800-377-4567 or crizalpro.com.

[rsandr]

Could it be this?




ESSILOR OF AMERICA’S CRIZAL® ALIZE™ MAKES AR LENSES CRYSTAL CLEAR AND EASY TO CLEAN. Crizal Alizé uses a thin layer of perfluorinated-polymer molecules to fill and smooth the microscopic pores on the lens surface. This layer helps resist dirt and smudges, thereby keeping lenses clean. Clarity and durability are achieved as the Crizal lens technology is combined with hydrophobic benefits. The topcoat offers scratch resistance and is anti-reflective. For more information, contact Essilor of America at 800-377-4567 or crizalpro.com.

Chrystal clear is an old saying, certainly not owned by Essilor.

Chris should have sood his ground on this one.

[Mikef]

Chris You might want to change that name again!



DiamondCoat™ lens coatings are currently protecting the lenses of Leupold Mark 4® CQ/T® riflescopes in the dustiest, sandiest environments on earth: Iraq and Afghanistan. We’ve added this durable multicoat to the objective lens and eyepiece lens of the VX-L to give you the ultimate in abrasion resistance and light transmission,
for a flawless sight picture over a lifetime of hard use. It has made a difference in battle, and will make a difference where you hunt.

[For-Life]

Chrystal clear is an old saying, certainly not owned by Essilor.

Chris should have sood his ground on this one.

Essilor's new Alize is supposed to have Clear Guard in it. That is why Crystal Clear Guard is a problem for it.

[hcjilson]

If Chris was using the name before Alize' came out, Essilor would be hard put to win in court. Unfortunately most lack the resources of Essilor's legal department, and take the path of least resistance. Hard call, but the burden of proof would be on Essilor.

[edKENdance]

I can't possibly believe for a second that there might be bullies in the world of optical companies.

~~&~~

/that's the synbol for sarcasm btw.

[AWTECH]

Chris:

They request you change the name. I would suggest that you respond that you will consider changing the name however you feel that there is no infringment and also request that they supply the US trademark number that they claim you are interfering with.

I think the term "Crystal Clear" would not be able to be trademarked, a logo style of the term could be trademarked. Since this a commonly referred to term used for may items, not just optical lenses, the actual words would not be restricted.

Demand that Essilor actually claim a specific trademark that you are infringing.

Also you would within your rights to request compensation for any such name change that they are demanding if they can not clearly demonstrate a clear cut conflict or infringement.

It is Essilor's responsiblity to show that they attempt to protect their trademarks and your agreeing to change at their first request just makes their job easier. Don't be push over. Let them file suit if necessary since you maybe able to have an attorney take this on a contingency for a counter suit if they do not have a specific infringement. You can always agree to change the name once they file the suit. As they will be hard pressed to show any significant money damages.

I believe this is simply an attempt to build a file to prove in future cases that they are vigilante in defending their trademarks.

[Chris Ryser]

I believe this is simply an attempt to build a file to prove in future cases that they are vigilante in defending their trademarks.

Thanks all of you for the comments.

I originally came up with it in 1987 long before Essilor even thought about it. It took them 15 years to catch on, but now it is theirs.

I have posted this here because this product and theyre Alize are having the same end result. They had been using an earlier version of mine (the one without anti-fog) for many years. (They now evaporate a basically similar concentrated product in chamber)

I have been selling the original "Super Hydrophobic" since 1991 and it has been and is still used by AR coaters (even Essilor related ones) from Germany to China.

To change the name is no problem for me as it is a product that has been well sold, and still is, for many years under it's original name.

In this case they seem to be upset that I am tapping a new market, which is the optical retail under a different product name.

When the manufacturers overpriced UV lenses disapeared from the market in the early 1980s because every retailer and lab UV'd the lenses in house.

With my product, the retailer can now achieve the same results as the slick coated AR lenses, only at a fraction of the cost butwith even more added features, than their coating can provide. A very similar case of the UV lenses 20 years ago.