A ‘counterfeit’ is typically an report which is intentionally produced to appear like an original report so that clients are deceived into purchasing the counterfeit for the original. As a rule, counterfeits are substantially significantly less high-priced than the original.
“Counterfeiting” is a disease that infects and erodes the brand value of a trade mark. The brand worth is the perception of a brand in the minds of shoppers. As a brand starts getting counterfeited gradually but certainly, the perception of the branded item starts to erode and when shoppers see a branded solution in the marketplace or in the possession of other consumers they wonder regardless of whether it is genuine or counterfeit.
Two definite symptoms that a brand has been infected by counterfeiting is [a] the complaints the brand owners begins receiving about defective or substandard goods and [b] reduction in sales in locations where counterfeiting is taking location.
In most jurisdictions all more than the world the law has prescribed very effective treatments to fight the counterfeiting illness: The Trade Marks Act in various jurisdictions, for instance, dispenses a deterrent punishment for counterfeiters which may incorporate a jail sentence and stringent fines apart from the confiscation and destruction of the counterfeiting articles. In Thailand for instance counterfeiting is punishable even by death. Punishments under the Copyright Act are also stringent with a prescribed punishment of a jail sentence and with an escalation series of fines. In addition to remedies below the criminal law the law of most nations also deliver the brand owner remedies under the civil law by which suits for damages can be filed and damages obtained swiftly and effectively. In some countries, for instance in China, administrative remedies are readily available by which although jail terms are not prescribed, rapid seizures of counterfeit solutions are readily available. Numerous of the laws relating to trans-border sales of goods also have constructed in treatments for inspecting and confiscating suspected counterfeit goods. In most jurisdictions the procedure for taking recourse to successful treatments has also been streamlined with adequate safeguards against misuse of the provisions, such as the requirement of taking approvals from the trade mark registry prior to initiating criminal proceedings. In spite of these treatments, nonetheless, right now the counterfeiting illness is as rampant as ever and has infamously accomplished epidemic status.
In this dissertation an attempt is made to analyze where we went wrong, to supply an helpful technique for controlling this disease and finally to provide methods to eradicate the illness by implementing these strategies.
To have an understanding of the ramifications of the counterfeiting illness, we have to very first comprehend its aetiology: the causative aspects and the conditions favorable for the development and proliferation of the counterfeiting virus.
The single most critical causative issue for counterfeiting is ‘greed’. Counterfeiting will flourish in an atmosphere where the expense of the original product that is sought to be counterfeited is fairly higher, the original item is in short provide and has a substantial demand and the appear and feel of the product is simply reproducible. Pharmaceutical counterfeiting falls commonly in this class. A further environment in which counterfeiting thrives is where the original product has snob appeal. Luxury goods, such as designer accessories are species of this genus. Consumers who cherish the original higher worth products for their snob appeal are willing to acquire the substantially lower priced counterfeits knowingly for flaunting purposes.
A demographic environment necessary for counterfeiting is an location exactly where there is a reasonably massive population, with a thriving often unregulated industry and a buyer profile that is upwardly mobile. This tends to make countries like China, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangla Desh and Thailand locations eminently appropriate for the counterfeiting virus to thrive and proliferate. A current trend is the proliferation of what are called totally free trade zones exactly where there is minimum regulation of goods coming in and going out. These absolutely free trade zones such as in Dubai, Hong Kong and close to the Panama Canal have develop into transit points for the transfer of counterfeit goods specifically counterfeit drugs, from nations exactly where they are cheaply manufactured to nations where these goods have a profitable market worth. Pharmaceutical goods are particularly nicely suited for transfers by way of the cost-free trade zones.
Counterfeiting activity broadly falls into two categories: Locally made or domestic counterfeits and counterfeit items imported from abroad or foreign counterfeits. We advocate diverse strategies for tackling domestic and foreign counterfeits. One more slightly distinct category of counterfeits is refilling, which has been now refined to an art kind. In refilling original packages are recycled to the customer right after being refilled with locally made product. Printer cartridges, Alcohol and perfume bottles are especially susceptible to this kind of counterfeiting.
In most jurisdictions, counterfeiting is becoming attacked, in our opinion, in a random, haphazard and unsatisfactory manner. This has truly exacerbated the disease and increasingly the counterfeit virus has turn into resistant to cure. Anti counterfeit actions are handled either by law firms or agencies headed by retired police or government officials. These actions take the kind of minimalistic investigation by ‘informants’ followed by ‘raids’ on ‘unearthed retailer of counterfeit goods’. The raids are conducted with the enable of police officials either straight or beneath the orders of a neighborhood judicial officer such as a magistrate. Following these raids, the typical strategy is to settle the matter with the person or enterprise raided. Counterfeit goods seized in the course of these raids are confiscated and destroyed and the individual who is raided usually ends up paying ‘compensation’: a portion of which goes towards financing the raid in the initial spot and a fraction goes to the brand owner. If a case is registered, this is necessarily required to be compounded or quashed in legal systems exactly where criminal circumstances relating to IPR cannot be compounded. The brand owner is proudly presented periodically with a report on the quantity of raids effectively carried out, the quantity of counterfeit goods seized, and the compensatory amounts collected along with undertakings from individuals not to repeat the activity. There is virtually fake money euro to pursue complaints to conviction. For a conviction what is needed is a trial. Criminal trials want to be meticulously performed by lawyers proficient in the criminal approach. These trials are time consuming and relatively far more pricey than the method of acquiring the initial orders and conducting ‘raids’. Nonetheless, this failure to oversee the proceedings to its conclusion, is in my opinion the root cause of the escalation of the trouble. I will as soon as once more clarify this with respect to the analogy of an infected state of being. Truncating the anti-counterfeit proceedings by settlement is like stopping treatment prematurely on the second day of a five day course of antibiotics, when the patient feels drastically improved and wholesome. This final results in the danger of a relapse and also the possibility that the microbe becomes resistant to the therapy.
What truly happens is that the counterfeiter realizes this tactic adopted by the brand owner and the collateral damage of the ‘raid’ and the ‘compensation’ is then constructed in into the counterfeiter’s price range as an actuarial physical exercise. For each and every one front that is raided there are ten that are left untouched. As far as undertakings, given by the persons caught in the act, are concerned, they begin afresh beneath a new name and a new identity. Once again typically the counterfeiter ‘indemnifies’ the raided retailer. The counterfeiter produces extra counterfeit goods to compensate for the loss suffered due to the fact of the raid. Normally the persons raided are the retailers and it is not uncommon that the counterfeiter ‘compensates’ the raided retailer with whom the counterfeit articles are placed for sale on a consignment basis in any case. The brand owner and the genuine consumers are the eventual sufferers.