Complaint against the Ancesbolion Co., Ltd. for close imitation of the appearance and construction of another firm's products in violation of article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
Case:
Complaint against the Ancesbolion Co., Ltd. for close imitation of the appearance and construction of another firm's products in violation of article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
Key Words:
mold-cutting template, constitutional diagram, close imitation
Reference:
Fair Trade Commission Decision of June 29, 2000 (the 451st Commissioners' Meeting); Disposition (89) Kung Chu Tzu No. 114
Industry:
toy manufacturing (3912)
Relevant Laws:
Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law, and Article 41 of the pre-amendment Fair Trade Law
Summary:
1. This case arose out of a complaint by a business enterprise that the wooden IQ-challenger puzzles manufactured and sold by Ancesbolion Co., Ltd. (product codes T01001-006) were completely identical with the complainant's own products in terms of name, external appearance, and graphical design assembled, creating likelihood of confusion and influence on the market business order. 2. A comparison of the two companies' products, taking place at different times and places and from a distance, indicated extreme similarities in appearance. The instruction booklets also contained very similar assembly diagrams, parts diagrams, and product codes. Ancesbolion claimed to have obtained several copyrights for the external appearance of its product and that it did not engage in copying. However, the protection of copyright does not extend to industrial manufacture articles. Plus, in any event the questions of copyright protection and whether the Ancesbolion product was a copy in violation of the Fair Trade Law are of two entirely different matters. To prove Ancesbolion's developmental efforts for the product in question, it was requested by a letter and subsequently during its appearance before the Commission to provide corroborating evidence. However, the company has not yet been able to provide such evidence to show that the product is in fact its own original creation. 3. Ancesbolion further maintained that the product in question was a sample used for price quotations and not yet for sale on the market. However, a product catalog stating "publication April 1998" and a price list all clearly contained introductions of the product. Plus, the product submitted by complainant proved that Ancesbolion had been manufacturing the products. Thus what Ancesbolion claimed in its defense cannot be accepted as it contradicts normal business practices. Further, as the product is made of wooden materials and required assembly before use, cutting template, mold cutting, and assembly diagrams were all essential for the developmental processes of the a product. It was revealed that the complainant completed the above-described process between1990 and 1991. In 1994, the complainant published began placing advertisement and selling products. Copies of design drawings, assembly diagrams, relevant printed publications, and order receipts for the product submitted by the complainant ar e on file for review. Accordingly, the complainant had spent time, efforts, and capital to develop the product in question, whereas Ancesbolion directly copied the fruit of these creative efforts without assuming any corresponding risk or costs. It is difficult to see such conduct as conforming to ethical business competition. The conduct is sufficient to influence the market business order, and thus in violation of article 24 of the Fair Trade Law. 4. In conclusion, in consideration of the motivations, influence on the market business order, and the size of businesses operation involved in the above illegal conduct, the respondent was ordered to cease said practices and was fined 50,000 New Taiwan Dollars in accordance with the forepart of Article 41 of the Fair Trade Law. Appendix: Ancesbolion Co., Ltd.'s Uniform Invoice Number: 52948688 Summarized by Wu Hung-kuan; Supervised by Chu Wei-ching