Originally Posted by slider
I have to agree with belfast-biker that someone who buys a cheap pair of knockoffs would not buy Oakley's if the knockoffs weren't available. That doesn't mean that Oakley isn't hurt by these knockoff sales. They dilute the Oakley trademark by putting it on a low quality product. I think Oakley could make a fairly strong case of both Trademark Dilution and Infringement if they wanted to. Problem is that only the seller is in the US. The moment they put one small seller out of business another would pop up. Since the manufacturer is overseas they would be difficult to stop and a lawsuit would only bring attention to the availability of the knockoffs.
http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/dilution.html
http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/infringe.html
-s
My point was meant to support your earlier comments. That is, how confident can you be that these glasses provide the excellent protection that the originals do? The Oakley name and symbol are on the knock-offs primarily to convince the buyer that these are every bit as good as the original, when in fact they are probably not. For all we know, they only block 20% of UVA and B (unlikely but possible). In this instance the continued distribution of these knock-off would hurt not only Oakley but the unwary buyer. I'll pass (on many levels).
-mark