Anhui Provincial Market Supervision Bureau announces typical cases of law enforcement against unfair competition since 2020
By: Date: 2021-03-09 Categories: chinesefood Tags: ,
  1. Anhui Eighty Eight Culture Media Co., Ltd. Unfair Competition Case
   1. Basic facts:Anhui Eighty Eight Culture Media Co., Ltd. changed its website name from”Literature and Literature Online” to”China Federation of Literary and Art Online” in August 2019, and published 83 manuscripts for others on the site. A fee of 1096 yuan was charged.”China Federation of Literary and Art Circles” is an abbreviation clearly defined by the constitution of the China Federation of Literary and Art Circles. The organization is a mass organization, which has formed a certain influence in related industry groups and is well known by the public. The behavior of Anhui Eighty Eight Culture Media Co., Ltd. without authorization of the”China Federation of Literary and Art Circles” and its website name was changed from”Literature Federation Online” to”China Federation of Literary and Art Circles Online”, which caused consumers to mistakenly believe that the parties concerned are related to”China Federation of Literary and Art Circles.” Literary and artistic associations have a specific relationship. Upon investigation, the parties involved published a total of 83 manuscripts for others on the website and charged a fee of RMB 1,096.
  2. Legal basis and punishment:The party’s unauthorized change of the name of his website from”Wenlian Online” to”China Wenlian Online” belongs to Article 6, Paragraph 1, Item 2 of the”People’s Republic of China Anti-Unfair Competition Law” The prescribed confusing behavior constitutes an act of unfair competition in which the names of social organizations (including abbreviations, etc.) that have a certain influence on others are used without authorization. According to Article 18 of the”People’s Republic of China Anti-Unfair Competition Law”, the Market Supervision Bureau of Luyang District, Hefei City issued an administrative penalty of ordering the parties to stop the illegal activities and fined 49,000 yuan.
  2. False promotion and sale of three-no masks by Ju XX in Chaohu City, Hefei
  1. Basic case:Ju XX, Chaohu City, Hefei City, the WeChat circle released the message”a batch of medical masks purchased internally by the public security system, 20,000 are not many! Simple packaging, you can believe it.” After investigation, the parties engaged in the purchase and sale of disposable masks from January to February 2020 without obtaining a business license, and the actual purchase of the masks sold was:on January 31, they were sold in Sichuan at a price of 2.7 yuan/piece. I bought 6,000 disposable masks somewhere. On February 3rd, I bought 20,000 disposable masks at 3 yuan/only somewhere in Xiaomou, Nanjing. The 26,000 disposable masks purchased by the parties did not have identification labels, and the total payment was 76,200 yuan. A total of 23,900 disposable masks were sold. 2,100 were presented free of charge. The total sales payment was 81,710 yuan, and the total illegal income was 11,810 yuan.
   2. Legal basis and punishment:The party involved in the sale of unidentified label disposable masks on WeChat Moments through false propaganda without obtaining a business license violated the eighth”Law of the People’s Republic of China Against Unfair Competition” Article 1, Article 10 of the Electronic Commerce Law of the People’s Republic of China, Article 2 of the Measures for Investigation and Punishment of Unlicensed and Unlicensed Operations, and Article 27, Paragraph 1 of the Product Quality Law of the People’s Republic of China. Pursuant to Article 20 Paragraph 1 of the”People’s Republic of China Anti-Unfair Competition Law,” Article 13 of the”Measures for Investigation and Punishment of Unlicensed and Unlicensed Operations”, and Article 54 of the”Product Quality Law of the People’s Republic of China”, Chaohu The Municipal Market Supervision Bureau decided to consolidate administrative penalties of ordering the parties to make corrections, confiscating 11,810 yuan of illegal gains, and fined 210,000 yuan.

  3. False propaganda case of an auto supply store in Cao, Bozhou
  1. Basic case:An auto supply store in Bozhou City, Cao, marked”CCTV Listed Brand” in a prominent position on the”Jin Minghe” car urea solution label produced and sold, and the label did not indicate the manufacturer . After investigation, CCTV has never issued a title or certificate containing the words”CCTV Listed Brand” to any company. The parties were also unable to provide valid proof materials. By the time the case was filed for investigation, the parties involved produced 1,550 barrels of Jinminghe brand urea solution for vehicles, and 1,475 barrels had been sold, with a profit of RMB 7,825 and a value of RMB 24,450.
   2. Legal basis and punishment:The party’s false propaganda behavior violated Article 8 of the”People’s Republic of China Anti-Unfair Competition Law” and Article 27, paragraph 1 of the”Product Quality Law of the People’s Republic of China”. In accordance with the provisions of Article 20 of the”People’s Republic of China Anti-Unfair Competition Law” and Article 54 of the”Product Quality Law of the People’s Republic of China”, the Bozhou Municipal Market Supervision Bureau decided to merge and order the parties to make corrections, immediately stop illegal acts, and fines An administrative penalty of 200,000 yuan.
  4. Case of unfair competition in Pingxue Supermarket, Dongcheng, Tianjiaan District, Huainan
   1. Basic facts:The Huainan City Market Supervision Bureau received the report and conducted a law enforcement inspection on the warehouse of the Dongcheng Pingxue Supermarket in Tianjiaan District, Huainan, located in the third grain warehouse of Tianda North Road, and found that there was a bottle of liquor in the warehouse of the party concerned. The outer packaging box of the liquor is marked with Anhui Yingjiu Liquor Industry Group Co., Ltd. In addition, a total of 1,199 paper bags and 1,199 outer boxes were stored in the warehouse of the party concerned. The main parts and overall impression of the packaging and decoration of the above-mentioned liquor bottles are similar to the packaging and decoration of the”Xuanjiu” liquor bottles produced by Anhui Xuanjiu Group Co., Ltd., which are provided by the parties in December 2016. , Outer packaging boxes, handbags, etc. commissioned to a brewery to produce. After investigation, Xuanjiu is the flagship product of Anhui Xuanjiu Group Co., Ltd. The”Xuan” trademark has been continuously used on liquor since the 1980s. The Xuanjiu series of trademarks and products have won different honors from 2007 to 2014. And the brand name, it has a high reputation and reputation in the market, and it is a commodity with a certain influence. The packaging and decoration of the above-mentioned Xuante wine bottles sold by the parties are similar to those of Xuanjiu bottles produced by Anhui Xuanjiu Group Co., Ltd. in terms of appearance, color distribution, and distribution of marked fonts. It is enough to cause confusion and lead people to mistakenly believe that Xuanjiu produced by Anhui Xuanjiu Group Co., Ltd. may have a specific connection with Anhui Xuanjiu Group Co., Ltd.
  2. Legal basis and punishment:The party’s unauthorized use of the same or similar signs of the name, packaging, decoration, etc. of the goods that have a certain influence with others violates Article 6 of the”People’s Republic of China Anti-Unfair Competition Law” (1) According to the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 18 of the”People’s Republic of China Anti-Unfair Competition Law”, the Huainan City Market Supervision Bureau decided to order the parties to immediately stop the illegal activities, confiscate the illegal goods, and fine 20,000 yuan Administrative penalties.
  5. Commercial slander case of Shucheng Peacock City Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.
  1. Basic case:Shucheng Peacock City Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. planned and commissioned Shucheng Dacheng Outdoor in early May 2020 to publicize and display its city-building strength, operational capabilities and successful cases, and to promote the sales of real estate properties. The Advertising Co., Ltd. produced a photo exhibition board with the content of”New Lakeside Lake depends on the size of the apartment, the environment is lower, and the Peacock City is lower than the public stall”, and it is installed in the party’s marketing center for display and promotion. The content of this photo exhibition board is the text and pictures of the comparison between Xinbinhu Peacock City and a project of other companies:the text and pictures on the left and right are from five aspects:”city building capacity, house type, real price difference, actual area difference, regional location and living environment” , Comparison of a project between Xinbinhu Peacock City and other companies. The text content is edited by the party concerned. The pictures of Xinbin Lake Peacock City are derived from the renderings or schematic diagrams of the Peacock City. The pictures of a certain project of other companies are from online screenshots. The parties concerned cannot provide the authenticity of the above text and image content. Through the comparison of the above text and pictures, the parties displayed and promoted the Xinbin Lake Peacock City, slandered and promoted a project of other companies, and misled the buyers that the Xinbin Lake Peacock City real estate in the Hangbu Economic Development Zone was superior to the competition of a project of other companies in Xinbin Lake. The rival’s real estate damages the rival’s commercial reputation and commodity reputation.
   2. Legal basis and penalties:The party’s acts of damaging competitors’ business reputation and product reputation violated Article 11 of the”People’s Republic of China Anti-Unfair Competition Law”, according to the”People’s Republic of China’s Anti-Unfair Competition Law” According to Article 23 of the Law, the Market Supervision Bureau of Shucheng County, Lu’an City decided to issue an administrative penalty of ordering the parties to stop unfair competition, eliminate the impact, and fine 100,000 yuan.
  6. False publicity case of Chizhou Lianghong Real Estate Co., Ltd.
  1. Basic case:When Chizhou Lianghong Real Estate Co., Ltd. sold commercial houses in the”Xiyue Mansion” community in Zhongliang, Guichi District, Chizhou City, the first one was to use leaflets, physical model houses, display yard distribution maps, and real estate consultants. Oral explanations and other forms of publicity promise to consumers that there are front and rear yards on the first floor of the high-rise building, but there is no planned yard on the first floor; the second is to promote to consumers by means of leaflets, model houses, sand tables, and VR video displays of network model houses. There are north-south terraces on the top of the high-rise building and promises that the north-south terraces will be used by the owners on the top floor. The north terrace is actually built without publicity, and the owners on the top floor do not have exclusive rights to the terrace; third, the facade of Building 23 along the street is displayed through the sand table and advertising panels. There are no obstacles between the roads. After the actual completion, a retaining wall with a height of 0.33 to 1.35 meters was erected in front of the square in front of the gate of Building 23, and a railing with a height of 1.05 meters was installed on the retaining wall, which did not conform to the publicity. After investigation, the Zhongliang”Xiyue Mansion” community developed by the parties opened for the first time on May 26, 2018. The model houses and sand table models were completed and opened to the public in March 2018. 54 commercial houses on the first floor and 46 commercial houses on the top floor were involved. There are 8 facade houses along the street, with a total contract value of approximately RMB 167,763.39 million.
  2. Legal basis and penalties:The parties’ misleading and false publicity of the commercial houses they sell violates the provisions of Article 8 Paragraph 1 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. Refer to the “Market Supervision and Administration of Anhui Province” In accordance with Article 58 of the Administrative Punishment Discretionary Power Standard, in accordance with the provisions of Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, the Chizhou City Market Supervision Bureau decided to issue an administrative penalty of ordering the parties to stop the illegal act and fined 1,000,000 yuan.
  7. False propaganda case of Huizhou Tuwei Hotel in Huangkou, Tunxi District, Huangshan (Huayu Case)
  1. Basic case:Huangkou Huizhou Tuwei Hotel in Tunxi District has been producing and selling”Yangtze River Fish” dishes since the hotel opened in 2017, and asked the advertising company to produce and write”Yangtze River Fish, especially Jiang Xian” A roll-up billboard with the words”Master Operated, etc.” was placed at the entrance of the store to promote the dish. The parties also placed a glass fish tank displaying the live fish products in the hotel lobby, and made paper on the outside glass of the fish tank. The quality label is used to introduce the name, place of origin, unit price and method of the fish. The name is”Yangtze River Huayu” and the place of origin is”Tongling”. According to investigations, the “Yangtze River Huayu” listed above is actually a freshwater cultured bigmouth catfish. The upstream supplier is the Baofa Aquatic Product Sales Store in the People’s Market of Tongguanshan District, Tongling City. The actual place of production is Hubei or Guangdong Province. The fish was purchased. At that time, the supplier’s sales receipt stated that the fish was named”Huayu”. In order to attract customers to increase the reputation of the fish, the parties deliberately added the words”Yangtze River” and”Specially invite master Jiang Xian to operate”, but in reality they did not The special chef Jiang Xian was invited to operate it, and the fish was only made by the ordinary chef of the shop. The”Yangtze River” and”Master Jiang Xian specially invited to operate” on the billboard were all fictitious.
   2. Legal basis and punishment:In order to pursue economic interests, the parties used the above-mentioned roll-up billboards, self-made labels and other forms to conduct false commercial propaganda in the hotels they operate violated the”People’s Republic of China Against Unfair Competition” According to the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Law, in view of the fact that the parties actively correct and reduce the harmful consequences of illegal acts, in accordance with Article 20 paragraph 1 of the”People’s Republic of China Anti-Unfair Competition Law” and the”Administrative Punishment Law of the People’s Republic of China” According to the first paragraph of Article 27, Huangshan City Market Supervision Bureau decided to impose an administrative penalty of 20,000 yuan.