Question

Scenario 3: International Law

Reliable Time Inc. imported a shipment of watches into the United States. The watches contained the mark “Lauren” which is a registered trademark owned by Ralph Lauren. U.S. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized the watches pursuant to the Tariff Act, which authorizes seizure of any “merchandise bearing a counterfeit mark.” Ralph Lauren did not make or sell watches at the time of the seizure. Reliable argued that because Ralph Lauren did not make watches at the time of the seizure, the watches it imported were not counterfeit, and the civil penalty imposed by CBP was unlawful. The government argued that the mark was counterfeit and that the Tariff Act does not require the owner of the registered mark to make the same type of goods as those bearing the offending mark.

Decide the outcome for the case by providing support from scholarly sources such as the textbook, journal articles, cases and information from the CBP website.

Answer 1

A counterfeit of a mark that is registered on the principal register in United States Patent and Trademark office and is still in use is a crime and the penalty can be imposed on the counterfeiter.

In this case, although the mark 'Lauren' is a registered trademark owned by Ralph Lauren but is not in use currently as Ralph Lauren do not make and sell watches currently, so it is not a crime nad unlawful and thus Reliable Time Inc cannot be penalised

References

A Golden Opportunity : Supporting Up and Coming US lUxury Designers through US Legislation Available At : https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.co.in/&httpsredir=1&article=1662&context=bjil

How the seizure of counterfeit goods can go bad Available at : https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1377&context=mjlst