Hidden risk of foreign trade orders, hardware companies do not blindly orders

Since the beginning of this year, with the improvement of the export situation, the local foreign trade economy has become active again. However, the staff of Ningbo Customs in Zhejiang recently discovered that many foreign trade companies are blind when they take orders. They have not carefully identified whether the customer’s needs are in line with national laws and regulations. Some companies have eaten a lot because they did not understand the relevant national export policies in time. deficit.

Case No. 1: An import and export company limited by Ningbo purchased a total of 7,200 storage tubes from a teaching equipment company in preparation for export to the Netherlands. During the inspection, the customs found that the bank of coins was similar in shape to a globe and had a map of the world on it. It was required to provide a “Map Drawing Approval Approval Letter”.

"We just purchased the exporter's exporter according to the customer's request. The supplier did not tell us at the time that the export should provide proof that it can be declared like ordinary goods." The person in charge of the import and export company told the reporter: “We later contacted the supplier and they knew that they had this “Map Graphic Approval Approval Letter.” Although the goods were normally exported, they did not provide the corresponding proof in advance. The tube was temporarily detained in the warehouse of the customs supervision during the investigation and evidence collection. Two voyages were delayed and the company suffered a lot of losses. If the company was unable to provide the corresponding proof at the time, this shipment could not be exported and the company would face high fines.

Case 2: In recent days, due to alleged appearances of infringement, Zhejiang Machinery Manufacturing Co. was forced to exchange 3,500 US dollars in the high cost of the guarantee, in exchange for 3180 motorcycle aluminum wheels to permit the exit "token." It is understood that this company did not make necessary understanding of the orders in advance, and did not even think about the possibility of infringement of the appearance of the products. Due to the tight schedule of exporting India’s aluminum contracts, they could only choose to After the customs has applied for paying the bond with the goods, the goods will be released first. If the follow-up court decides that the goods are infringed, the company will face high compensation liability, and this 30,000-dollar security deposit will also be compensated.

In recent years, there has been a gradual increase in the number of cases of infringement of design patents. This is mainly due to the fact that the appearance design is only a simple shape imitation. Domestic small workshop companies are relatively easy to produce, unlike utility models and patents for inventions. Technical content.

According to statistics from Ningbo Customs, in the first half of this year, the Customs seized 16 cases of infringements on design patents, accounting for 4.38% of all infringement cases. The top three products involved were planers, accounting for 28%, and glass. Rub, accounting for 16%, ballpoint pen, accounting for 13%, in addition to emergency lights, ** tube, outdoor lights and other goods.

Case 3: Recently, Ningbo Customs conducted a check on a batch of speakers exported to Nigeria from a certain company in Zhejiang Province and found that “pionear” was printed on the packaging carton, and the “pioneer” known to the public was the famous audio and video entertainment equipment brand in Japan. . The words "pionear" and "pioneer" were so similar that they alerted the Customs inspection officers and suspended the speakers. After contact with the right holders, and after the Customs investigation found that these "pionear" speakers constitute similar infringement.

The owner said that when he took orders, he began to think that he was a pioneering trademark and he dared not take orders. Customers could specify that the letters were different. They thought that there was no problem with a trademark that was not exactly the same, and there was no thought that there was similar infringement. In the end, this batch of 100 boxes of about 4,000 loudspeakers was detained by the Customs and the shippers had to be held liable for infringement and “pay the bill” for the damages caused to the pioneer rights holders.

In the first half of this year, Ningbo Customs seized a total of 15 similar infringement cases, accounting for 4% of all infringement cases. The infringements of “NIKE”, “PHILIPS” and “BOSCH” ranked in the top three positions, respectively 3, 2 and 2. From. According to the "PRC Trademark Law," the use of the same or similar trademarks as the registered trademarks of the same goods or similar goods without the permission of the trademark registrant is an exclusive right to infringe the registered trademarks.

Case 4: A company in Guangzhou commissioned a customs declaration company in Ningbo to apply for export of a batch of flashlights with a declared amount of US$20,468. "Taitou" rights holders in Guangzhou City Flashlight Industry Co., Ltd. reported that the flashlights had a "tiger head card" graphics, infringing the company's trademark rights. Ningbo Customs found out during the inspection that it was as reported. “At the time of taking orders, I saw the 'Tigerhead' drawing, but I didn’t have the word “Tigerhead”. I thought the figure and the word were not working together. There was no problem with a single person. Who knows that this also hits the 'land mine.'” the owner replied "If the goods are confiscated, I am most worried that because of this case, the credit rating of the company will decline, and after the customs clearance, it will not be able to enjoy the original level of preferential customs clearance measures."

It is understood that in the first half of this year, Ningbo Customs seized a total of 19 cases of various types of graphic trademark infringement, accounting for 5.2% of all infringement cases. There were 5 cases of trademark infringements of "tricyclic graphics", 4 cases of infringement of "NIKE hook graphic" trademark cases, two cases of infringement of "Crocodile graphics" trademark cases, and violations of "Adidas Triple Slant Graphics" and "PUMA Cougar Graphics". Trademarks and other cases.