Customs stopping Chinese clones

groom

As a warning to anyone looking at getting a Chinese clone of better known brands I've attached a letter a friend got from customs.

He bought a Galaxy Note style phone from HK and received the attached letter in the post.

The letter refers to it as being a Samsung phone although there was no reference to Samsung or Note on the website. Any similarities are implied or evident from the pictures of the phone rather than the branding.

I think it's pretty surprising that customs are this involved in confiscating goods. It would be a bit easier to understand if it sported Samsung branding rather than customs agents deciding on patent infringement. Will be interesting to see if he ever gets it.

thegreatiam

I dont think there is a difference between the customs on a brand rather than the type of item

Ie small electronics

the fact they wrote Samsung phone on it is probably a description

groom

thegreatiam wrote: »

I dont think there is a difference between the customs on a brand rather than the type of item

Ie small electronics

the fact they wrote Samsung phone on it is probably a description

Huh? No they aren't looking for a payment.

They are flagging it as a knock off Samsung and will probably destroy it if they figure it is.

bidiots

I'd presume Revenue are just looking for the customs value. Not the fact that its a 'knock off', which shouldn't make a difference regardless. All electronics coming for China over a certain value will be open for scrutiny regards custom tax, some have been lucky to avoid this, some haven't.

groom

bidiots wrote: »

I'd presume Revenue are just looking for the customs value.

Not the case. Look at the attached letter

thegreatiam

the letter says they are being detained to determine if they were imported/exported without paying duty

the notes mention if they are rip offs they will be seized and destroyed. and if not released with a payment of duty.

I think they want paying.
the fact they mention counterfeit is additional i think.

griffdaddy

If it's import duties he'll just have to pay up. If it's counterfeit goods customs can swing for it. The fact that they even put Samsung on the letter is ropy enough. There's constant pressure from EU bodies and lobbying organisations to cut down on counterfeit goods. Sometimes the customs of member states get a bit carried away with themselves. The Dutch customs were especially bad when I lived there.

thegreatiam

griffdaddy wrote: »

If it's import duties he'll just have to pay up. If it's counterfeit goods customs can swing for it. The fact that they even put Samsung on the letter is ropy enough. There's constant pressure from EU bodies and lobbying organisations to cut down on counterfeit goods. Sometimes the customs of member states get a bit carried away with themselves. The Dutch customs were especially bad when I lived there.

I would assume they would have to prove by copyright laws that it is counterfeit. if there is no mention of branding on the item then that will be tricky.

bidiots

griffdaddy wrote: »

If it's import duties he'll just have to pay up. If it's counterfeit goods customs can swing for it. The fact that they even put Samsung on the letter is ropy enough. There's constant pressure from EU bodies and lobbying organisations to cut down on counterfeit goods. Sometimes the customs of member states get a bit carried away with themselves. The Dutch customs were especially bad when I lived there.

My thoughts exactly.

groom

I hope you're right. And the letter does seem to be contradictory.

But my friend said he contacted the number given and was told that they (customs) were waiting to hear back from Samsung. I know it's mind boggling but that what they told him.

If it was just a case of a payment being due why wouldn't they just come out with it and demand it? I've paid duty straight to a DHL guy in the past albeit for stuff from American Eagle rather than some HK website.

bidiots

Oh Oh:(

http://www.revenue.ie/en/customs/leaflets/postal-guide.pdf

and

http://www.revenue.ie/en/customs/prohibitions-restrictions/prohibitions-restrictions.pdf

14. Prohibitions and Restrictions
Certain goods such as drugs, indecent or obscene material, weapons, endangered
species and counterfeit foods are prohibited from being brought into the country under
any circumstances. Their attempted importation through the postal system will result in
seizure. Certain other goods may only be imported with a licence issued by the
appropriate authorities e.g. meat or meat products require a licence from the
Department of Agriculture and Food.
A full list of prohibited or restricted items is contained in Prohibitions and Restrictions

Who ever wrote the customs declaration must have f**ked up with the description, I'd fight it regardless and demand my parcel.

pickarooney

Edited: Advising others how to break the law is a big no-no.

Bluefoam

groom wrote: »

As a warning to anyone looking at getting a Chinese clone of better known brands I've attached a letter a friend got from customs.

He bought a Galaxy Note style phone from HK and received the attached letter in the post.

The letter refers to it as being a Samsung phone although there was no reference to Samsung or Note on the website. Any similarities are implied or evident from the pictures of the phone rather than the branding.

I think it's pretty surprising that customs are this involved in confiscating goods. It would be a bit easier to understand if it sported Samsung branding rather than customs agents deciding on patent infringement. Will be interesting to see if he ever gets it.

I didn't get any of that from the letter. I seems to me that they want him to pay the duty... As is normal when importing goods.

groom

Bluefoam wrote: »

I didn't get any of that from the letter. I seems to me that they want him to pay the duty... As is normal when importing goods.

The boxed off paragraph at the bottom is the part that refers to the suspicion of counterfeit goods and it has been confirmed to him by phone and email that that is their focus.

groom

They've confirmed to him now that they are going to destroy the phone.

They referred it to Samsung who stated it infringed on their design and if he isn't happy with this decision it'll be a civil matter between him and Samsung.

It all seems a bit mad. Although there wasn't any references to Samsung or Note on the website he bought it from, he's not sure what the packaging was like and could have had some Trademark on it.

Anyway he won't be taking Samsung to court about it.

bidiots

That sounds crazy, as I said, whoever filled out the custom declaration needs a kick in the you know what. Who did he order from?

eamonnq

bidiots wrote: »

That sounds crazy, as I said, whoever filled out the custom declaration needs a kick in the you know what. Who did he order from?

Link in the first post:

http://www.xbuynow.com/n7000-5-3-inch-android-4-1-1-3g-smart-phone-with-dual-sim-wcdma-gsm-mtk6575-wifi-gps-wvga-8mp-camera-black.html

ongarite

Agree with above, that's not the standard revenue letter for duty/VAT due on product.
I paid VAT on my Android TV stick last week and it wasn't like this.

eamonnq

I think there was a load of cheap tablets stopped last year as well, because they had the square on the round button (like an Ipad ).

Bit much though if you just go onto a Chinese site and see something that you want to order and then it gets stopped because it looks like something else.

groom

bidiots wrote: »

That sounds crazy, as I said, whoever filled out the custom declaration needs a kick in the you know what. Who did he order from?

http://www.vopmart.com/n7000-5-3-inch-android-4-1-1-3g-smart-phone-with-dual-sim-wcdma-gsm-mtk6575-wifi-gps-wvga-8mp-camera-black.html He ordered it from this website

I'm not getting your point about how the customs declaration was filled out.

groom

ongarite wrote: »

Agree with above, that's not the standard revenue letter for duty/VAT due on product.
I paid VAT on my Android TV stick last week and it wasn't like this.

Different situation though. Even though part of the letter seems to imply its about moneys owed, the lower bit refers to counterfeiting.

Yours would have been a simple case of duty or vat owed.

groom

eamonnq wrote: »

I think there was a load of cheap tablets stopped last year as well, because they had the square on the round button (like an Ipad ).

Bit much though if you just go onto a Chinese site and see something that you want to order and then it gets stopped because it looks like something else.

Yeah really questionable practice by customs although in this case the device really does look like a Note

eamonnq

groom wrote: »

Yeah really questionable practice by customs although in this case the device really does look like a Note

and the real problem is that if you don't know what a Note looks like and you just order one of them because you want it.......and then they confiscate it, your money is down the drain.

I was thinking of ordering a Jiayu G3 but am thinking again now, as it might look like a Samsung item of a similar name.

groom

eamonnq wrote: »

I was thinking of ordering a Jiayu G3 but am thinking again now, as it might look like a Samsung item of a similar name.

Well you would be a bit worried after I posted this but I'd imagine my mate had severely bad luck and the Jiayu looks pretty original doesn't it as far as any smart phone can look original. It's a legitimate design. I'd go for it if I were you.



It would deffo put me off something that is an obvious clone though. Specifically a clone of 2 very litigious companies

eamonnq

Aye, I probably will but will have to flog off a few of my other gadgets first!!!

bidiots

groom wrote: »

http://www.vopmart.com/n7000-5-3-inch-android-4-1-1-3g-smart-phone-with-dual-sim-wcdma-gsm-mtk6575-wifi-gps-wvga-8mp-camera-black.html He ordered it from this website

I'm not getting your point about how the customs declaration was filled out.

The links I posted earlier explain it. I'm getting the feeling that people are presuming, in error, that all Chinese branded phones are 'clones' or counterfeit.
There are many established brands in Asia that we are unfamiliar with, but there are also options to purchase clones of reputable branded phones.
I've bought a couple of Jiayu models which are not clones, without hassle from revenue.
I would be interested to see how Revenue will act on the amount of clones available on Donedeal or other sites?
Why exactly was your friends phone picked out? Was it a dodgy declaration or silly packaging....

wayne040576

This is actually fairly common with customs.
It can also happen if you are getting shoes/trainers shipped. They'll get a rep from Nike/Puma etc to inspect them and if they say the shoes are counterfeit they'll destroy them.

eamonnq

groom wrote: »

I'm not getting your point about how the customs declaration was filled out.

If the guy sending the phone wrote 'SAMSUNG PHONE' on the declaration that would have been a fairly stupid thing to do.

groom

bidiots wrote: »

Why exactly was your friends phone picked out? Was it a dodgy declaration or silly packaging....

Not exactly clear. He's talked to someone in customs on the phone but they've been pretty dismissive with him telling him it's a matter between him and Samsung. That's probably the annoying part. If it's explained clearly to you and you've no argument against it it's a fair cop but they haven't been transparent

bidiots

If they explained the situation clearly then I could accept it. If they are acting as you explain then that would drive me up the wall. I'd tell them to give me my parcel and let Samsung deal with it then, if that's their game. Hope your mate gets it sorted in his favor some how anyway. Thanks for the heads up.

Otacon

I got the Zopo ZP900 Leader recently sent from China. No such issues cropped up though. Suppose I was lucky.

groom

Otacon wrote: »

I got the Zopo ZP900 Leader recently sent from China. No such issues cropped up though. Suppose I was lucky.

It does seem to borrow from a few other designs doesn't it. Nice looking phone.

TMC99

groom wrote: »

Not exactly clear. He's talked to someone in customs on the phone but they've been pretty dismissive with him telling him it's a matter between him and Samsung. That's probably the annoying part. If it's explained clearly to you and you've no argument against it it's a fair cop but they haven't been transparent

I'm fairly certain he has the right to inspect the goods and packaging. Clearly if its being passed off as a Samsung (description / packaging / trademark etc.) then he has a problem. If its 'infringing' on Samsung patents then its a more grey area.

If it was me I would look to examine the goods - if its not being passed off as a Samsung - and its an IPR issue then I would consider appealing the decision.

At the end of the day a lot of these phones are starting to look very similar - even court cases seem unable to decide if patents are being infringed if we look at the Samsung/Apple situation. I would like to know why Revenue did not refer it to Apple for example ? What factors make it a distinctly a Samsung phone ?

(Just in case - Not a serious question above - obviously it looks 'more' like a Samsung than an Apple - but just making the point that one pair of shoes can look the same as another pair - but it does not mean they are infringing copyright)

5500

I'd love to have seen the box ect and if it was branded in anyway as Samsung, but after a quick google of the phone packaging ect it doesnt appear that it is. You normally get another letter confirming seizure that has details of how to appeal, personally that's what I would be doing

groom

My friend got the following response to a request for a full explanation to how the device was found to be counterfeit and what he can do to appeal.

I wish to advise you that the phone and the IMEI number was checked by Samsung and they confirmed that the produce breached their Intellectual property rights. If you wish to formally appeal the decision you may do so as outlined on the back of the Notice of Seizure.

Anyone know what the IMEI would reveal?

Zonda999

groom wrote: »

My friend got the following response to a request for a full explanation to how the device was found to be counterfeit and what he can do to appeal.



Anyone know what the IMEI would reveal?

Well for a start, that it doesn't exist in Samsungs database, meaning that if Samsung didn't manufacture it, it must be counterfeit, especially if there's crappy Samsung branding on the box

It is annoying for your friend though, surely it would be far easier for everyone if the Chinese just put some generic packaging on it rather than alerting people like customs officers..

groom

Zonda999 wrote: »

Well for a start, that it doesn't exist in Samsungs database, meaning that if Samsung didn't manufacture it, it must be counterfeit, especially if there's crappy Samsung branding on the box

It is annoying for your friend though, surely it would be far easier for everyone if the Chinese just put some generic packaging on it rather than alerting people like customs officers..

As far as he is aware there wasn't any Samsung branding on it. I've told him to request to see the packaging. To be clear this isn't the case of a knock off pretending to be a Samsung. Rather it is a phone that customs / Samsung would argue contains elements of Samsung design and it is pretending to be a distinct design so you would hope it wouldn't have a Samsung IMEI

TMC99

If it was in Samsung's database then I'd be getting worried.

If the manufacturer is a bona fide phone manufacturer then they will have gotten an IMEI from the GSM association. If that IMEI is not listed with the GSM association then it is a fake/copy IMEI.

I would have thought that Samsung would only be concerned if the IMEI used was one that was issued to them (Samsung). Outside of that I don't see what issue the IMEI would be to them or Revenue.

Milfhunter

I have a similar problem with a THL w1+. Customs sent it to Samsung and am awaiting a response. I am anoyyed as the phone is a real brand and not a clone of anything.

Is there a chance that they could say its a clone, the brand is similar to the jiuyau brand etc as in a legitimate design and a repituable company.

MJ434

Milfhunter wrote: »

I have a similar problem with a THL w1+. Customs sent it to Samsung and am awaiting a response. I am anoyyed as the phone is a real brand and not a clone of anything.

Is there a chance that they could say its a clone, the brand is similar to the jiuyau brand etc as in a legitimate design and a repituable company.

What was the outcome?

Murt10

Sorry for coming on this so late, but the fact that Samsung claims their stuff is being copied is a bit rich.

Kettle and pot spring to mind, see attached article on the subject in Vanity Fair.


http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2014/06/apple-samsung-smartphone-patent-war