If someone is found to be misleading the public by falsely printing on products or ads that they either own or have a patent pending they’ll be fined.
Heavily.
$500 for every ad or every item sold bearing the offending patent 'mark’.
That's 500 bucks per offence. Half the cash would go to the plaintiff, the other half to the US Government.
They introduced the button-down polo shirt....
.... and they introduced seersucker into the US...
Pause.
And then there’s the "Adjustolox" bow tie device.
This allows the wearer to change the fit of the tie with ease and precision.
The patent however expired in 1950.
Pause.
Enter Mr Raymond E. Stauffer – an American citizen, a committed bow tie wearer and a patents lawyer. He decided to evoke the 'false markings' ruling and take Brooks Bros to court.
And besides, they said, the company who make the bow tie for them also make the same tie for other companies - Bloomingdale’s, Saks Fifth Avenue and Lord & Taylor for example. So what’s the harm?
According to this law, replied Stauffer, ‘any person’ can make a claim, so why not him?
At the initial hearings the district court sided with Brooks Brothers.
Then on August 31, 2010 The U.S. Justice Department intervened. They argued that Stauffer’s claim was valid and the case should be heard after all:
Who knows, said The Justice Department , maybe the injured party here is the Government. This may even be a violation of The United States sovereignty.
Pause.
If Brooks Bros lose, it could cost them 500 big ones multiplied by every single bow tie sold (and advert) bearing the‘Adjustolox' patent mark since 1950.
Do the math; I dare you.
