Second Thought On Thailand's Piracy Crackdown

[webfact]

Second Thought on Piracy Crackdown

I have a story of a couple who run a small shop in Chon Buri province to tell you. They were fined 30,000 baht for having four counterfeit Mickey Mouse bags for sale in their shop. In my opinion, their plight should make relevant authorities involved in suppressing piracy think twice about the approach they have taken. They may need to rethink their strategies and come up with a new approach to effectively deal with this problem without causing too much pain and heartache for ordinary people.

The couple in question owns a small gift shop and their business was quite straightforward. They bought items at wholesale prices and sell them at marked up prices, making profits from the price difference. They bought bags with an image of Micky Mouse on them to sell and one day a man claimed to be a lawyer told them they've committed a crime of selling pirated items. He told them they've broken the law and are liable for 30,000 baht in fines.

When the couple couldn't afford to pay the huge fine they decided to be prosecuted and take their chances in court in a hope that the court would listen to them and rule in their favor. Although the bags are pirated goods, the couple said they didn't have any intention to violate copyright law. What they did was unknowingly bought these bags to resell them just like any seller does. Of course, they broke the law but, perhaps, without any real intention to do so. Is it too harsh to slap them with huge fee when all they did was trying to make a living?

While waiting for bail application to be processed, the male vendor was remanded. Isn't it distressing at all to think that a small-time vendor is now being labeled as a criminal after he's broken a law he does not fully understand.

My question is – is it more effective to cut a deal with the seller and turn him into a witness to identify the shop he had bought the bags in question from so that the shop can incriminate the factory that made these bags later. Why victimized the seller? If you argued that we must adhere to the law, I will object that the law may be inadvertently designed to pass the blame onto the sellers, making them the inevitable scapegoats. Arresting these sellers is not a way to address the root of this problem. The authorities should go after the factories.

Before this case, I've learned of another case where a printing shop violated the intellectual property law by using unauthorized fonts. The authorities didn't make the shop owner incriminate the shop from which he bought the font CD. There is no question that the font shop knowingly violated the law protecting intellectual property.

I personally think the authorities should try their best not to victimizing the ordinary people who are just trying to make a living through 'honest' means. They sure have bigger fish to fry by going after the factories churning out these pirated items and intentionally violate copyright law.

'Dern Nah Chon' by Narit Sekteera, Page 6, Matichon Newspaper.

Rewritten by Pornchai Sereemongkonpol

Please note that the views expressed in our "Analysis" segment are translated from local newspaper articles and do not reflect the views of the Thai-ASEAN News Network.

-- Tan Network 2010-08-05

[apetley]

Unfortunately this seems to be yet another case of going after the soft target whilst letting the bigger fish get away.

As for "unknowingly bought these bags" I have never come across a retailer in Thailand who did not understand that they were seling 'copy' goods.

Still, 30k seems very harsh for 4 cheap knockoffs.

[VictorMeldrewBKK]

Claiming they didn't know or didn't mean to break any laws is a child's excuse. We all know what is pirated and what is not.

It's usually the price that gives it away.

If there weren't any small fish selling the pirated goods then the big fish would go out of business. They all know they are selling pirated goods so this sob story is as credible as the store owners.

[BWPattaya]

I disagree. I think it is quite plausible that a couple of Tha shop owners did not realise that buying some bags at a wholesaler would bring such a huge problem.

As for a printer using fonts, so many are downloadable from the internet it is easy to consider their use is OK. How many of Thaivisa members have a computer that is 100% legal?

[geriatrickid]

Boohoo. I feel so bad for these rip off artists. Sure it was 4 bags this time. How many of the rip offs did they sell in the week prior, or month prior? How many did they sell last year. All of these merchants know they are selling counterfeit goods. All that it took was for the merchant to say no thank you to their dealer.

These merchants are sympotomatic of the current culture of laziness and ripoffs as it applies to intellectual property. Why bother coming up with an original idea when you can copy someone? Why pay royalties, when you can use a counterfeit product? It is evident with all the fake medications circulating. The culture accepts counterfeiting as a legitimate activity. This has to change because it is costing Thailand. Innovative medications bypass Thailand because the locals try to avoid paying royalties or respecting patents. That's what happens when ripping off people is considered to be ok.

FYI- My computer is 100% legal including all software. Maybe that is one of the reasons I have not been bothered by crashes or malicious programs.

[GarryP]

If the bags were fake/counterfeit Disney bags, you can be pretty sure that the owners of the shop knew. If, however, they were just images of Mickey scanned or applied to generic bags, then it is understandable that they did not know that use in such form may also constitute an infringement of the rights of Disney. However, hasn't the copyright on this character already expired? If it has, wouldn't that put the image in the public domain and in which case no offence has been committed?

[dom samui]

30000 is not enough, they sell also fake tyres, brakes ....

[Just1Voice]

While some might consider this as using a sledge hammer to kill a mosquito, personally I think it should be more like a warning bell to all vendors. When the word gets out that they could get slammed for selling counterfeit goods, then they're going to stop buying them from the suppliers, which eventually puts the suppliers out of business.

Granted, the police should be going after the suppliers, but doing it this way also helps.

[Eazy-Going]

If this is the case I would suggest that a vast number of Thai traders are guilty of the same. These goods can be seen at all markets, bazaars, emporiums, boutiques etc. throughout Thailand so there must be a hel_l of a lot of fines/court actions in the pending. With all of the cheap Chinese copies flooding the market, how can anyone keep a handle on everything. The difficulty in Thailand is actually buying genuine articles across the board from CD's, clothes, auto-parts, electrical goods and parts...virtually everything, and when you do find the real thing the costs are usually astronomical, far more than you would pay in the West which only encourages the purchaser to go for the cheaper option. We are all guilty but if this what stopped at source, i.e. the maufacturer of the 'hooky' product than this action would have more viability and would make a lot more common sense imo.

[Hirsch]

Are we talking law or emotions here? If law then I have a few questions:

o Why shouldn't the seller be punished when he broke the law? Because he didn't know that he broke the law? That's hardly a valid reason as proven by the court.

o Because there are bigger fishes out there who are breaking the law? I guess so, but that shouldn't be to any concern of the seller, but maybe to the lawyer who reported the incident? (I'm hoping that he reports all crimes he comes across (even littering, all the traffic violations etc.), that he is only using genuine products and never breaks or bends any laws in any way.)

BUT

o What was the result of the raid of the whole seller? How many other sellers were tried due to the customer list any whole seller would most certainly keep. And please don't tell me that such a raid etc. has never happened because that could be seen as an unlawful act of neglect of duty on the law enforcement side, which I guess might be punishable???

o How many laws were broken or other crimes were obviously committed at the market, at the same time and location where the seller sold his bags? I guess dozens within less than a 500 m radius. Who has reported them? Just out of fun, let me guess nobody. If so, what is the charge for not reporting a crime or at least an unlawful act when you can't deny that you have it in Thailand? I actually don't know but IF there is such a charge I guess that might bring almost everyone in Thailand into trouble and that's the main problem as I see it. Everyone here is so used to laws being bended or broken every single day (just take the exhaust regulations for cars and buses as an example…), but where are the consequences??? But when the consequences are applied people usually don't understand why. Why them, why not the other one, why now, why can't they get away with it (sometimes even "as usual") etc. etc. I guess that's one of the big problems Thailand has to deal with, either in the one or the other way.

Sad story with a lot of depth into troubled waters….

[dantilley]

How many of Thaivisa members have a computer that is 100% legal?

I do.

[Eazy-Going]

How many of Thaivisa members have a computer that is 100% legal?

I do.

And I definately do, all with 100% legal software too, would not trust anything else.

[jayjay0]

Are we talking law or emotions here? If law then I have a few questions:

o Why shouldn't the seller be punished when he broke the law? Because he didn't know that he broke the law? That's hardly a valid reason as proven by the court.

o Because there are bigger fishes out there who are breaking the law? I guess so, but that shouldn't be to any concern of the seller, but maybe to the lawyer who reported the incident? (I'm hoping that he reports all crimes he comes across (even littering, all the traffic violations etc.), that he is only using genuine products and never breaks or bends any laws in any way.)

BUT

o What was the result of the raid of the whole seller? How many other sellers were tried due to the customer list any whole seller would most certainly keep. And please don't tell me that such a raid etc. has never happened because that could be seen as an unlawful act of neglect of duty on the law enforcement side, which I guess might be punishable???

o How many laws were broken or other crimes were obviously committed at the market, at the same time and location where the seller sold his bags? I guess dozens within less than a 500 m radius. Who has reported them? Just out of fun, let me guess nobody. If so, what is the charge for not reporting a crime or at least an unlawful act when you can't deny that you have it in Thailand? I actually don't know but IF there is such a charge I guess that might bring almost everyone in Thailand into trouble and that's the main problem as I see it. Everyone here is so used to laws being bended or broken every single day (just take the exhaust regulations for cars and buses as an example…), but where are the consequences??? But when the consequences are applied people usually don't understand why. Why them, why not the other one, why now, why can't they get away with it (sometimes even "as usual") etc. etc. I guess that's one of the big problems Thailand has to deal with, either in the one or the other way.

Sad story with a lot of depth into troubled waters….

You say

Everyone here is so used to laws being bended or broken

You might want to add expect it. This is a part of Thailand. I am surprised this lawyer made a point of it. Sounds like they were singled out to me. Yes it is wrong but 30,000 baht and being remanded dosen't sound right to me. Perhaps in the states but even there I doubt you would be locked up. I smell a rat.

[Hawk]

. How many of Thaivisa members have a computer that is 100% legal?

Well, I did buy my computer from ITcenter in Pantip Plaza, and I still have the sales receipt.

[thomo]

. How many of Thaivisa members have a computer that is 100% legal?

Well, I did buy my computer from ITcenter in Pantip Plaza,

So that's a no then.

Edited August 5, 2010 by thomo

[thomo]

I say get rid of all these counterfeit cheapies so we can all pay $200 for a mickey mouse bag for our kids.

[powderpuff]

Agree with the author. Follow the trail to the port & convict corrupt customs officials who allow this stuff into the port by the container full. Along with the middleman that deal in huge lots of these bags.

Some Thai should invent "Nu" mouse image for the bags.

Then if the US trade reps want to follow the trail back to the Chinese factories & insist the Chi Coms shut them down.

Edited August 5, 2010 by powderpuff

[thomo]

Yup, nothing but $100 disney DVDs for our kids.

I demand it!

[junglist]

How about lower the prices until the bootleggers go out of biz…

[TAWP]

IP Piracy is an imaginary crime purported by big corporations to squeeze out local competition and artificially keep prices up over a merchandise's actual value.

It is also built upon the fallacy that just because you once drew 2 mouse-ears anyone that draws mouse-ears of similar shape somehow are owing you money. Even if you made a new product and did all the work.

Copyright, patent and trademark laws are a joke that has and never will protect 'the little guy'.

Edited August 5, 2010 by TAWP

[sulasno]

anyone who sympathise with the sellers must be first time visitors to Thailand lol

[RedNIvar]

I thought that was part of the attraction of Thailand? Cheap goods, Nike Golf t-Shirts,Polo, Nautica, Gucci, fake Rolex, etc....

I had always considered Thailand a country with the worlds worst trucking system. A large number of shopping areas have all kind of fake goods that the sellers always claim to be original or 1st grade fakes. When asked why is it cheaper than original, common answer "fall off truck".

A small gift shop in Chonburi caught with 4 bags. I think they were setup by some rival shop owners. In my opinion if they were really serious about cracking down on these type of piracy, try raiding MBK, Chatuchak, Seacon Square, Future Park, Seri Center, Pratunam, and the list goes on and on and on.......

To target a couple in Chonburi for 4 mickey mouse bags is simply absurd. Again a slow news day.

[Payboy]

Who carried out that raid? Donald Duck?

[tonypace]

As the article stands, I cannot see where a crime has been committed. I justify that conclusion with the following reasoning:

1. Mickey Mouse, by virtue of the time of his first copyright (1928), could well be in the public domain now and no longer protected laws. However, Mickey Mouse is a Disney Corp. trademark which lasts forever. But, since Thailand is not signatory to any international trademark agreements, unless Disney Corp registered Mickey Mouse as a trademark in Thailand before it became a popular icon here, the trademark is not protected by law.

2. The retailer never pays for copyright or trademark usage. That is paid by either the manufacturer who buys the right to manufacture and or sell a particular product or the distributor. The retailer does not pay a separate fee for that privilege. It is included in the wholesale price set by the distributor.

3. Since when did a lawyer's simply saying something is a crime make it so? There is no indication that the lawyer did any research to determine that Mickey Mouse was copyright protected, (when MM was originally copyrighted, the term of a copyright was 27 years with a renewal permitted for an additional 27 years. While Disney Corp contends an Act of Congress has extended its copyright of MM until 2041 - life of the author +75 years some constitutional lawyers contend that the act would not stand up to a close examination by the high court.) It is possible from what we know of the attorney's involvement that he was just shaking them down for protection from prosecution.

It's a pity that so many are so quick to throw stones with so little evidence that a crime has actually been committed. Such people would be in ecstasy in Iran this week when three women are scheduled to be stoned for adultery (as a result of a global clamor, the sentence of one of the women will be commuted to hanging.)

[thedistillers]

My God, I can't believe there are people who think it's okay that a retailer is fined 30K for 4 Mickey Mouse bags, when blatant illegal fakes of luxury brands are all over the place in MBK and other shopping centers. I don't see how they deserve more than a warning.

As if retailers have a law degree to figure out all the details of what they can or can't sell. Obviously if you sell a Rolex watch for 20 bucks you know what you're doing, but again, a Mickey Mouse bag.

Edited August 5, 2010 by thedistillers

[wolf5370]

If the bags were fake/counterfeit Disney bags, you can be pretty sure that the owners of the shop knew. If, however, they were just images of Mickey scanned or applied to generic bags, then it is understandable that they did not know that use in such form may also constitute an infringement of the rights of Disney. However, hasn't the copyright on this character already expired? If it has, wouldn't that put the image in the public domain and in which case no offence has been committed?

On MM copyright, I would guess it has expired on the character being 80 years old or so. However, if they copied the whole design from a Disney T-Shirt or something, then its THAT copyrighted design they will be proscuted for. I contracted for a large clothes high street retailer in the UK and wrote a small system that checked for sales (and returns) on all charaters on all items so that correct payments could be made. This included Disney, but also several others. payment were only required on sales (minus the returns) - so no sale, no loss of revenue for character owner. I might add that all these items were made by the retailer's suppliers not character owners. The files that were produed went to auditors in all companies and were accepted before payments were made. Some character owners are very pushy on turn around payments within a short time too.

Does anyone else get the feeling that this couple were being stung by the so-called lawyer, who turned them over beause they would not play ball. I guess he if went into a large store that also sells fakes, say in an airport somewhere , he'd probably end up doing a Jim Thompson.

[thomo]

As the article stands, I cannot see where a crime has been committed.

Really? I've a got a pretty big suspicion that this is one:

one day a man claimed to be a lawyer told them they've committed a crime of selling pirated items. He told them they've broken the law and are liable for 30,000 baht in fines.

[sharking]

ouch

[wolf5370]

As the article stands, I cannot see where a crime has been committed. I justify that conclusion with the following reasoning:

1. Mickey Mouse, by virtue of the time of his first copyright (1928), could well be in the public domain now and no longer protected laws. However, Mickey Mouse is a Disney Corp. trademark which lasts forever. But, since Thailand is not signatory to any international trademark agreements, unless Disney Corp registered Mickey Mouse as a trademark in Thailand before it became a popular icon here, the trademark is not protected by law.

2. The retailer never pays for copyright or trademark usage. That is paid by either the manufacturer who buys the right to manufacture and or sell a particular product or the distributor. The retailer does not pay a separate fee for that privilege. It is included in the wholesale price set by the distributor.

3. Since when did a lawyer's simply saying something is a crime make it so? There is no indication that the lawyer did any research to determine that Mickey Mouse was copyright protected, (when MM was originally copyrighted, the term of a copyright was 27 years with a renewal permitted for an additional 27 years. While Disney Corp contends an Act of Congress has extended its copyright of MM until 2041 - life of the author +75 years some constitutional lawyers contend that the act would not stand up to a close examination by the high court.) It is possible from what we know of the attorney's involvement that he was just shaking them down for protection from prosecution.

It's a pity that so many are so quick to throw stones with so little evidence that a crime has actually been committed. Such people would be in ecstasy in Iran this week when three women are scheduled to be stoned for adultery (as a result of a global clamor, the sentence of one of the women will be commuted to hanging.)

1. Agreed, and therefore it is at most a civil matter and nought to mdo with the cops, being arrested or remand prison.

2. In this case yes, but not always true as retailers 'commission' suppliers to make certain goods and are therefore taking on that responsability from the supplier (in the case of say Walmart making its own cereal boxes with Donald Duk on them etc).

3. Act of Congress means diddly squat outside of USA - they could try and sue under US law I suppose, but there is no enforcement of payment even if they win.

3b. I'm with you on the shake down. Wonder what the odds are on a wrongful arrest/imprisonment might be. If the press had any balls here they might be asking the same questions as we are - and the grounds for arrest and confinement.

[Bagwan]

A ray of sunshine for all law abiding citizens. The death was announced today of Ray Ling, a Chinese fence. He fell off the back of a lorry.