Long Fong Co., Ltd. made false and misleading representations of its Classic Teddy children’s apparels through ways of making it known to the public and violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law

Chinese Taipei

Case:

Long Fong Co., Ltd. made false and misleading representations of its Classic Teddy children’s apparels through ways of making it known to the public and violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law

Key Words:

In any other way making known to the public, Press release, 100 percent imported

Reference:

Fair Trade Commission Decision of August 11, 2005 (the 718th Commissioners' Meeting), Disposition (94) Kung Ch’u Tzu No. 094086

Industry:

Retail Sale of Apparel Accessories (4635)

Relevant Laws:

Paragraph 1,Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law

Summary:

1. This case originated from a complaint filed by a member of the general public. The complainant bought Classic Teddy children’s apparel from a Taipei’s department store in October 2004. The ticket on the said product emphasized that Classic Teddy was very popular in England and thus has misled consumers into believing that the said brand was either an imported brand or an authorized brand. Moreover, the flag of England was printed on the ticket to reinforce the consumers’ beliefs that the said brand is an English brand. In addition, the enterprise of the said brand emphasized in the ET Today’s e-paper, the Apple Daily’s e-paper and the Economic Daily News that the brand was an English brand children’s apparel or the products came from England. However, a verification with the Intellectual Property Office of the Ministry of Economic Affairs indicated that Long Fong Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Long Fong Company) has ownership of the relevant Teddy trademark. The brand of Teddy Classic is a brand built up by Long Fong Company; neither Long Fong was an agent for the brand nor it was a foreign brand. It was obvious that consumers have been misled.
2. The ET Today’s e-paper of September 30, 2004, the Apple Daily’s e-paper of October 1, 2004 and the Economic Daily News of October 14, 2004 have reported the Classic Teddy children’s fashion show he ld on September 30, 2004 or the introduction of Classic Teddy children’s apparels. The Eastern Broadcasting Company, the Economic Daily News and the Apple Daily indicated that reporters have covered the said reports. But, the Eastern Broadcasting Company and the Apple Daily also indicated the relevant reports on the introduction of the Classic Teddy brand has either quoted or referred to the press release distributed by Pilot Company before or at the site of Teddy Classic’s Fall and Winter Fashion Show. The press release introduced the brand, fashion, design and material of Classic Teddy’s apparels with a purpose to solicit the potential trading counterparts, also to let the general or relevant public know about the brand through print or electronic media. Therefore, the press release distributed at the autumn and winter fashion show of children’s apparel qualifies under the category of “any other way making known to the public” as stipulated in Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law.
3. The press release claimed that “ the whole series of Classic Teddy’s autumn and winter apparels for 2004 were made of the 100 percent England-imported quality fabric”. The media’s reports misled the public into believing that the relevant products were either imported from overseas or originated from England. However, it is found that Long Fong acquired trademark registration for “Classic Teddy” on January 1, 2005. Long Fong Company presented a certificate of trademark licensing issued by Spur Technology Company , which certificate merely stated that Spur Technology Company had acquired a licensing of the England’s Classic Teddy trademark. Long Fong never provided certificate of product dealership or relevant information proving that the Classic Teddy trademark was an England brand. Furthermore, a review of the fabric import list provided by Long Fong showed that the country of origin was Italy and not the United Kingdom. Long Fong also confessed that imported European fabric was used in only some of the Classic Teddy children’s apparel and hence apparently inconsistent with the company’s advertisement that the Classic Teddy children’s apparel used 100 percent England-imported quality fabric. Hence, Long Fong’s press release of stating that “the whole series of Classic Teddy’s autumn and winter apparels for 2004 were made of the 100 percent England-imported quality fabric” was false and misleading and violated the provision of Paragraph 1, Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law. Taken into consideration the motivation of the unlawful act, the degree of the act’s harm to market order, the circumstances of the unlawful act, the scale of operation and attitudes after the law violations, Long Fong Company is ordered to cease the aforementioned unlawful act together with an imposition of administrative fine of NT$250,000.

Summarized by Yu, Fei-Ping;
Supervised by Wu, Lieh-Ling

Appendix:

Long Fong Co., Ltd.’s Uniform Invoice Number: 80432249