Re: [CR]Fake Hetchins controversy.

(Example: Production Builders:Cinelli)

From: "peter naiman" <>
Subject: Re: [CR]Fake Hetchins controversy.
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 18:08:31

Jerry; I'm not 100% sure, but I believe that the owner for whom David Miller works bought the name etc. but that the legal system in the UK is rather weak in this area. Maybe Clive or other from the UK could clear this up for us. The fact still remains, that David Miller has been producing cycle frames of quality under the Hetchins logo for quite some time. For someone to come along and claim to make Hetchins cycles is a bit wrong in many ways despite legalities. Peter Naiman Boston, Mass

>From: "Jerry & Liz Moos" <>
>To: "peter naiman" <>,
><>, <>, <>
>Subject: Re: [CR]Fake Hetchins controversy.
>Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 11:19:36 -0600
>I know we've discussed this topic before, but what was the conclusive
>evidence that David Millar is making the "real" Hetchins, while the others
>are "fakes"? As far a I've heard, neither Millar nor his competitors have
>any direct link to the original Hetchins company. If that is true, then
>whole matter comes down to whether in fact Millar purchased exclusive
>to the Hetchins name and other intellectual property or whether he did not.
>Perhaps I'm a bit naive about the British legal system, but if Millar's
>rights are clear, shouldn't a lawsuit or even a threatened lawsuit resolve
>the matter? Could the other party possibly be so bold as to virtually
>invite a lawsuit which they would surely lose? Would not the losing party
>have to pay the prevailing party's costs as in the US? It would seem that
>either there is more to the story than we have heard, or the effectiveness
>of the UK legal system (after which much of the US system was modeled) is
>less than we naive ex-colonials have been led to believe.
>Of course, I have seen neither the Millar frames nor the "fakes" "in the
>flesh, so perhaps those of you who, unlike myself, are qualified to express
>an opinion consider the Millar frames accurate and well made, while the
>others are crap by comparison. That would certainly be a valid reason to
>refuse to buy the non-Millar frames and to advise others to do likewise,
>avoiding a product because it is crap is quite different than avoiding it
>because it is a fake.
>Jerry Moos
>Houston, TX
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "peter naiman" <>
>To: <>; <>;
>Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 2:24 PM
>Subject: [CR]Fake Hetchins controversy.
>To all Hetchins lovers and lightweight enthusiasts in the CR Group. This
>letter comes to me from a fellow cycling friend in the UK with regard to
>"Fake" Hetchins. Included in the ad is the email address of these "fake"
>makers as well as their phone number in the UK. I can only ask that we all
>support David Miller in his efforts to get clear title to Hetchins
>production and to put pressure on the other maker to cease production.
>Please write by email or contact by any means these fake makers about your
>opinions. Hopefully as a group we can help spread the word as far and wide
>as possible. The address by email to contact the fakers is
> >< . To contact Andrew Moore about this issue, please
>Boston, Mass
> >Attached is an advert from Omega Cycles with regards to what best can be
> >discribed as a copy of the original and at worst a FAKE. The advert
> >to be mistaken with regards to it's comment about being back, "to be back
> >you first have to go" As we all know the geniune Hetchins has never
> >stopped trading.
> >
> >I've passed the details to both David Millar and Flash
> >
> >Happy new year to you all
> >regards
> >Andrew Moore
> >Wiltshire England
> >
> >
>Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.

_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at