The packaging of Jin Syn Supre 2T motor oil sold by Hsin Ho Cheng Enterprise Co., Ltd. was copied from the packaging of other products, in violation of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
Case:
The packaging of Jin Syn Supre 2T motor oil sold by Hsin Ho Cheng Enterprise Co., Ltd. was copied from the packaging of other products, in violation of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
Key Words:
Chin Ti, Jin Syn, appearance
Reference:
Fair Trade Commission Decision of May 17, 2001 (the 497th Commissioners' Meeting); Disposition (90) Kung Ch'u Tzu No. 070
Industry:
Petroleum Refining (1910)
Relevant Law:
Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
Summary:
1. The case arose when Teamworld Industries Corp. discovered that a motor-oil product named "Jin Syn Supre 2T," produced and sold on the Taichung market by Hsin Ho Chen Enterprise Limited Co. (Hsin Ho), had packaging similar to its own "Chin Ti Super 2T" product, creating serious confusion on the part of consumers. A complaint was filed by Teamworld Industries Corp. alleging that the appearance of the product in question violated Articles 20 and 24 of the Fair Trade Law (FTL). 2. Investigation showed that the "Chin Ti Super 2T" product was packaged in a container of the customary shape, type, and coloring, and that the text and design on the label of the product in question constituted the ordinary explanatory text and colors, having no significance as an indication of the product's source, and therefore not symbolic in nature. In addition, the two products each displayed the respective brand names "Chin Ti" and "Jin Syn," for which both had already obtained trademark rights, allowing their use as an indication of product origin, so that neither consumers nor the relevant industries should have been misled. Therefore it was difficult to determine that there was any violation of Article 20(1)(i) of the FTL. 3. Further investigation showed that the packaging of motor oil product varies greatly, with many possibilities for various combinations of container shape, color, labeling of contents, printing fonts, text, and pattern arrangement. However, besides using a silver-colored container like the "Chin Ti Super 2T" product with blue-black labeling on the front and reverse sides, as well as the use of a font, coloring, and placement of the "Jin Syn Supre 2T" name closely similar to the "Chin Ti Super 2T" name, Hsin Ho's "Jin Syn Supre21" also used an identical overlapping-letter style; and the descriptive text on the label was identical. While that text is mostly factual, the labeling on the front and reverse sides is different. Thus observing the appearances of the two products in question, there was obviously an attempt on the part of Hsin Ho to copy the "Chin Ti Super 2T" packaging and to benefit from the fruits of Teamworld Industries Corp.'s labor. Hsin Ho's conduct constituted an unfair practice sufficient to adversely affect the trading order in violation of Article 24 of the FTL. 4. In conclusion, the facts of Hsin Ho's unlawful conduct were clear. In consideration of factors such as Hsin Ho's motive, business revenues, attitude of cooperation with the Fair Trade Commission's investigation, and the effect of its conduct on the trading order, the Fair Trade Commission imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 and ordered Hsin Ho to recall and modify all products using packaging that unlawfully copied Teamworld Industries Corp.'s products within two months, pursuant to the forepart of Article 41 of the FTL. Appendix: Hsin Ho Cheng Enterprise Co., Ltd.'s Uniform Invoice Number: 84648328 Summarized by Tai, Mei-Chin; Supervised by Yeh, Ning