Safety Education Magazine's use of the phrase "Registered by the GIO" in fire prevention equipment sales promotions constituted a deceptive act sufficient to affect trading order

Chinese Taipei

Case:

Safety Education Magazine's use of the phrase "Registered by the GIO" in fire prevention equipment sales promotions constituted a deceptive act sufficient to affect trading order

Key Words:

deception, fire prevention equipment, false information, deceiving consumers

Reference:

Fair Trade Commission Decision of November 23, 2000 (the 472nd Commissioners' Meeting); Disposition (89) Kung Ch'u Tzu No. 201

Industry:

Magazine (Including Periodical) Publishing (8320)

Relevant Laws:

Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law

Summary:

1. This case originated with a letter in which the Consumer Protection Commission raised concerns that the Republic of China Safety Education Center was intentionally using the phrase "Registered by the Government Information Office" to cause the public to mistakenly believe that the center was acting under government supervision. In doing so, the center relied on the fact that its Director, Mr. Ts'ai An-hsiung, had registered a publishing enterprise, Safety Education Magazine Press, with the Government Information Office on 21 January 1997 (registration Chu Pan Pei Shih Chih No. 1341). However, Chinese Taipei's Publishing Law was repealed on 25 January 1999, from which time on, registrations made under that law ceased to be valid and related publications ceased to be subject to review by the Government Information Office. That office had originally referred this case to the Taipei office of the Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau for investigation. After its failure to find any concrete evidence to establish that Mr. Ts'ai et al. had engaged in criminal deception, this case was then transferred to the Consumer Protection Commission, which in turn sent the letter asking the Fair Trade Commission to look into the allegations of improper marketing.

2. After investigation, it was the finding of the Fair Trade Commission that the Republic of China Safety Education Center was an internal unit of the Safety Education Magazine Press and had never been registered with any government agency. The center had in a mail announcing a lecture declared itself as a purely voluntary service organization that held and assisted with fire prevention and safety lectures and demonstrations. In the mail, it continued to use the invalidated registration number Chu Pan Pei Shih Chih No. 1341. Also, Ts'ai An-hsiung admitted that in the course of its educational work the center recommended, based on its professional opinion, particular brand of fire prevention equipment, but asserted that it did so voluntarily and without receiving a commission. The investigation, however, revealed that Ts'ai An-hsiung did in fact receive commissions for his product recommendation efforts.

3. In sum, Ts'ai An-hsiung used a void registration number issued by Government Information Office and filed in the name of Safety Education Magazine Press to promote the sale of fire prevention equipment for purposes of collecting commission. That registration had become invalidated upon the repeal of the Publishing Law, and the reference to it in the mail was obviously an attempt to mislead the public into believing that the equipment was being promoted under government's supervision, with the ultimate goal to sell products and collect commission. This was a deceptive act sufficient to affect trading order, and had constituted a violation of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law. After taking into consideration the respondent's small business scale and unlawful gains, this case was disposed pursuant to the fore part of Article 41 of the Fair Trade Law.

Appendix:

**: For information of translation, click here