Surely courts must have ruled on the right of a third-party to use photographs to illustrate / expose fake goods? Then the answer became clear: How many guys selling fake goods would go into court to seek to protect their rights to their photographs? Not a single one! What would they claim as damages -- the amount that they would have stolen from the innocent purchaser?

This is absolutely the point, no seller of fake watches, especially one from South America, is going to take the time, effort or money to pursue this because the defending attorney will demand that the seller prove the watch is genuine and the seller can not stand the scrutiny that a court case would bring. Especially if we can call on depositions from Hans and Jack Heuer.

From what I see, this means two things:

1) While realistically there remains a chance that some seller will go to the trouble to make waves, the chances of that happening are very small, as the expense and hassle of taking legal action is prohibitive.

2) There is potential for abuse. In other words, it's possible that one of us can make a mis-diagnosis and it would cost someone doing legitimate business money. So we all should be careful about what one states as fake, franken or phony.

-- Chuck