- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
INTA approves two resolutions to curb counterfeiting activities
INTA approves two resolutions to curb counterfeiting activities The International Trademark Association (INTA) approved two resolutions bolstering the efforts to curb anti-counterfeiting and illegal activities around the globe. The resolution expects stronger commitments and enforcement capabilities for fighting counterfeit worldwide. INTA is a global organization of brand owners...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
INTA approves two resolutions to curb counterfeiting activities
The International Trademark Association (INTA) approved two resolutions bolstering the efforts to curb anti-counterfeiting and illegal activities around the globe. The resolution expects stronger commitments and enforcement capabilities for fighting counterfeit worldwide.
INTA is a global organization of brand owners and professionals working for supporting the trademark and related intellectual property for fostering consumer trust, economic growth, and innovation. This is a not-for-profit association. As per the details on their website, the association consist of 6500 organization across 185 countries and represent more than 34.000 professionals across the world.
These two resolutions relate to the Proceed of Counterfeiting and Remark as Criminal Counterfeiting. These two resolutions increased enforcement capabilities and the framework in dealing with various situations in Counterfeiting. In case of any such confiscated goods, the adequate disposal of those goods. Also includes any such criminal sanctions when genuine products are being infringed without brand owners' consent. These resolutions were necessary for the market since there has been a surge in counterfeiting products with more fake products in the market. Products related to the Covid-19 pandemic were also found to be counterfeited with fake medicine and PPE kits. It is assumed that the adoption of these resolutions will help o protect the brand owners and consumers worldwide.
The first resolution of Proceed of Counterfeiting follows the model where it stops the financial flow which the counterfeiters use for their operations. It supports the legal basis where the Court confiscates and seizes those goods if there appears to be a result of counterfeiting. The Court is empowered to order for confiscating and seizure of the goods which can help in restraining the infringer for any further infringement. The resolution suggests that Court should order confiscate the assets so that the infringer should not evade the confiscation. Therefore, this resolution normally tends to provide the framework of effective confiscation.
The second Resolution is Remark as criminal counterfeiting, which calls for genuine products that are "remarked" and modified to be included in the definition of "counterfeit" and for remarking to constitute a crime under anti-counterfeiting laws, even where the original trademark as affixed by the trademark owner has not been altered. The resolution does not cover aftermarket or refurbished goods. The resolution states that "remarking "is likely to cause consumer confusion and harm, and should, like other forms of counterfeiting, constitute a crime of trademark counterfeiting".
INTA CEO Etienne Sanz de Acedo said, "INTA's resolutions send a strong message to governments around the world that any form of counterfeiting should not be tolerated. By implementing the suggested best practices, individually and collaboratively with other countries, policymakers can help protect consumers on multiple fronts. That should be the highest priority".