Postby dognose » Wed Jul 07, 2021 3:08 am
Jeweler Misusing the Whiting & Davis Name on Mesh Bags Legally Enjoined
One of the most flagrant examples of preying upon the good name of a manufacturer was brought to light in Boston shortly before Christmas, in an attempt to pass as Whiting & Davis Mesh Bags those of foreign manufacture.
A friend of Mr. Whiting remarked that a jewelry store on Tremont Street was prominently featuring Whiting & Davis Mesh Bags in its window. Mr.
Whiting went to see the window and was amazed to see that a foreign-made bag bore the sign, "Whiting & Davis Mesh Bags." Hardly a minute was lost in securing the evidence against the jeweler. A photographer was secured who photographed the window display and the bag and sign.
Two men, selected from our advertising agency, went to the store and asked to see Whiting & Davis Mesh Bags. They insisted upon having the one displayed in the window. The men immediately made affidavits of the transaction and conversation and the case was given without delay to a well known Boston law firm.
A large advertisement, reading "Warning to the Public, to Retailers and Wholesalers, and to Importers," was prepared, setting forth the facts of the case and warning against imitations. This was inserted in the Chicago Tribune, the New York Times, the Boston Herald and Boston Traveler. A letter has been prepared to go to all wholesalers and retailers enclosing a copy of the newspaper "Warning" advertisement.
Legal action was also immediately started. On December 18th Whiting & Davis Company brought a bill in equity in the Superior Court, Suffolk County, Mass., against Harry Rosenfeld and Edward N. Levine, both of Boston, co-partners doing business under the firm names of Hall & Edwards, Rosenfeld & Levine, Harry Edwards Jewelry Company, R. & L. Jewelry Company and R. & L. Merchandise Company, at 118 Tremont Street and 159 Washington Street, Boston.
The bill alleged that the defendants fraudulently used the trade-marks and trade-names of "Whiting & Davis," "Whiting & Davis Co." and "Princess
Mary" in connection with mesh bags of inferior quality and represented that the German-made and other bags were made by Whiting & Davis. The bill asked for a preliminary injunction, for an accounting and for a permanent injunction against using the name of Whiting & Davis in connection with any goods other than when made by this company. The question of the temporary injunction was heard on December 21st in the Superior Court in Boston, which resulted in its being issued. The hearing for assessing damages will be heard January 2nd.
We intend to use this case as an example and warning to all dealers who may be tempted to prey upon the name for quality which "Whiting & Davis" now stands for in the mesh bag industry.
The imitation bags in question are one of the boldest steals ever attempted in competition. Apparently, genuine Whiting & Davis Mesh lings were used as models and copied as they closely resemble the genuine bag. Even the construction is copied. The bags however, are poorly made and are bound to create dissatisfaction among buyers, as even what is claimed to be "soldered " mesh cannot stand any strain without lipping. The foreign manufacturer who did this, however, must have had no conception whatever of the patent and copyright laws of this country, as the imitation mesh bags infringe upon the designs and methods of construction for which copyrights and patents have either been issued or applied for. it is therefore evident that, we have an excellent case against those who sell these imitations. We intend to spare no time nor expense to secure every legal remedy to prohibit this brazen and most unfair competition.
Source: Wadco News - 5th January 1923
Trev.