Well Long Information Co., Ltd.

Case:

Key Words:

attorney letter, trademark right, trading order

Reference:

Fair Trade Commission Decision of October 6, 2010 (the 987th Commissioners' Meeting), Disposition Kung Ch'u Tzu No. 099111

Industry:

Other Computer Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing (2719)

Relevant Laws:

Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law

Summary:

1. The FTC received a letter from an informer accusing Well Long Information Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Well Long Co.) of sending through Universal Master Law Office on April 2, 2010 to the informer's trading counterparts and distributors an attorney letter claiming that the informer had copied the "FUTEK" trademark of the accused on its ink ribbons and had thus been raided by the police. The recipients of the letter were advised to stop purchasing or selling the ink ribbons from the informer. Although the accused had indeed applied to register the "FUTEK" trademark, the trademark was not yet approved and issued when the said attorney letter was sent out. In other words, the accused was not the owner of the "FUTEK" trademark. Hence, the informer considered the distribution of the attorney letter by Well Long Co. to accuse the informer of infringement on its rights of "FUTEK" trademark was an act sufficient to affect trading order and in violation of the Fair Trade Law (FTL).
2. Findings of the FTC after investigation:
   1. Well Long Co. did send the said l attorney letter to more than one hundred distributors and customers of the informer on April 2, 2010. Enclosed was only a newspaper clipping entitled "Li Guang Technology International Corp. Raided for Producing Counterfeit Ink Ribbons" from the United Daily dated March 13, 2010.
   2. According to the (99) Zhi-Shang 0305 Zi No. 09980272830 Letter from the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) of the Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) dated June 14, 2010, Well Long Co. had filed the No. 01019278 Application to IPO and the Intellectual Property Court to register the "FUTEK" trademark but the application was still being evaluated. Meanwhile, before the said trademark registration application was filed on September 12, 2001, the informer had already been using "FUTEK" as the trademark on its printers and ink ribbons. Therefore, Well Long Co. did not have the right to cite the Trademark Act to request for elimination or prevention of infringement on the "FUTEK" trademark since it had not yet obtained the right of trademark.
3. Grounds for disposition:
   The actions of Well Long Co. to distribute the aforesaid attorney letter, cite the regulation of the Trademark Act to accuse the informer of infringement on the rights of its "FUTEK" trademark, and request for elimination or prevention of infringement before its application of trademark registration was approved were no legitimate exertion at all of the trademark right in line with the Trademark Act. They were culpable conduct in terms of business ethics. Moreover, after the attorney letter was sent to over one hundred businesses, some of the recipients did terminate their purchase contracts for the products in question with the trading counterparts of the informer and some others canceled their orders too. Hence, the distribution of the attorney letter did indeed result in misconception among the informer's trading counterparts and have an effect on trading order. The conduct of Well Long Co. was unfair and in violation of Article 24 of the FTL. The FTC therefore imposed on the company an administrative fine of NT$50,000.

Appendix:
Well Long Information Co., Ltd.'s Uniform Invoice Number: 84285629

Summarized by: Peng, Wei-Cheng; Supervised by:Wu, Lieh-Ling