Posted on : 2023-10-20 03:44:57
Article : Good Evening Friday Management TASK 264- Brand abuse is one of those brand protection industry terms that gets used widely – often with some confusion and inconsistency.
Trademark infringement is the unauthorised use of the identification mark, logo, or brand name of another seller. Brand abuse is one of those brand protection industry terms that gets used widely – often with some confusion and inconsistency. It’s an umbrella term, generally referring to an attempt to exploit the reputation of a third-party brand for profit, personal benefit or with any malicious intent. This can come in the form of a scam, or fraud, through the unlawful use of one or more elements of a brand’s intellectual property (IP) assets, such as trademarks, copyrighted works, patents, and others.
The brand abuse includes: Counterfeits and replica products, Look-alikes, Trademark-infringing listings on online market places, Design-infringing products, Copyright infringements and piracy, Trademark squatting Brand impersonation, Rogue websites. IP infringement laws adherence and implications differ from country to country and as such there is no common international law or agreement available/made. As such China being a large country with more manufacturing facilities, low labour cost and populous big potential market, many world countries brands manufacturers operate in China and as such many cases of IP infringement are found and resolved with or without relief for the original brand marketer. This is a common observation in China for many industry and product sectors. In this article we will share two old case studies as offered by the China IPR SME Helpdesk. While China’s IPR regime has improved over the years, counterfeiting and other IP infringements are still commonplace making IP protection a priority when doing business in or with China. These two case studies involve European SMEs that were victims of IP infringement in China. The first case study demonstrates the importance of IP registration and IP regulation with contracts; while the second shows how important it is to be informed of the details and nuances of China’s IP protection regime.
1.A Dutch SME produces their additives in China under the name Roi Jaguar. Their general manager in China is tasked with making sure that the brand is protected in accordance with Chinese law. At one point the Chinese general manager leaves the company. Soon after he leaves, the Dutch SME discovers a very similar product in the Indian market called Roi Lynx. Both brands thus exist with the same word followed by the name of a species of big cat.
After some research, the Dutch SME finds out that after quitting the job its former general manager has started competing against it with very similar products. Also, after consulting the China IPR SME Helpdesk, the SME finds out the manager has registered the trademarks of the company in China in his own name instead of under the Dutch company in China.
The situation escalates due to some other related outstanding issues for which the former general manager still demands certain payments. The Dutch company refuses, so the former general manager goes to the local Authority of Industry and Commerce (AIC) and shows them the trademark certificate of Roi Jaguar, which results in the AIC confiscating the infringing products of the Dutch SME that carry the name Roi Jaguar. As the Chinese trademark registration is in the name of the former general manager, and the Dutch SME does not have the legal right to the name Roi Jaguar, the former general manager legally closes down the business of the Dutch SME with regard to the brand Roi Jaguar.
2.A Spanish SME in the scientific research and development industry has patents on certain cutting edge surgical instruments, all around the world, including China. At an international exposition of surgical instruments, the Spanish Company discovers a Chinese company advertising their patented products under the name of the Chinese company. The Spanish company obtains flyers and photos of the products. However, the Spanish company is also concerned that the Chinese company might have defensive utility model patents in place. Since utility model patents are approved quickly (usually within one year) and do not require an official examination of novelty, inventiveness and industrial applicability, this could potentially bar the Spanish company from entering the Chinese market.
Reading the above Two cases, post your perceptive/suggestive cases that you might have come across in our comments box or mail us. Our Management Solution for these cases of TASK 264 will be posted on our Good Morning Monday Management Solution post on 23rd Oct 2023.
Log on to www.wingsofmanagement.com to know more about our “Strategy” Management consultancy’s versatile capabilities, global clients and to read our weekly posts and projects.