You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

October 3, 2017

Tough Penalties for Import of Refurbished Hard Drives

Subscribe to Updates
Managing Intellectual Property

On August 25, the Customs Department of Hai Phong issued two decisions sanctioning a Vietnamese company for the import of trademark-infringing products and the import of prohibited goods, ending more than two months of customs clearance suspension proceedings. The decisions are groundbreaking because of customs’ pioneering standpoint in dealing with refurbished goods.

Beginning with Customs Recordal

To enforce its trademark rights in Vietnam, a large Silicon Valley high-tech company obtained customs recordal of its protected trademarks for products including computer hard drives, with the aim of seizing suspicious shipments at the border. Such recordal means that customs offices either on a nationwide scale or at some designated ports of entry/exit will monitor incoming shipments for goods that possibly infringe the recorded trademarks.

As a result of this monitoring, in early June 2017, customs informed the brand owner of a suspected inbound shipment containing 1,000 allegedly brand new hard drives bearing the company’s trademarks. The drives were declared to be sold at a price of only USD 3 per item, an indication that they were unlikely to be genuine, and were not imported by official distributors in Vietnam. Given this suspicious information, Tilleke & Gibbins, on behalf and under authorization of the brand owner, filed a request for suspension of the shipment for further verification. After reviewing some sample hard drives taken from the shipment, the brand owner found that all of the drives were used and/or refurbished.

Are Refurbished Goods Genuine or Infringing?

It was discovered that some or all of the components of the hard drives were genuine and indeed manufactured by or under authorization of the brand owner. However, according to Article 20 of Circular No. 11/2015/TT-BKHCN of the Ministry of Science and Technology on the sanctioning of administrative violations in the field of industrial property (Circular 11), used, repaired, or refurbished goods bearing protected trademarks are still regarded as trademark-infringing if the goods mislead consumers as to the origin of the products or business entity. In this case, the drives should be deemed to infringe the brand owner’s trademarks as the products were refurbished without control and consent of the brand owner.

The Vietnamese importer argued that they did not consciously commit infringement, as they did not know the status of the drives at the time of purchase and import. Also, the drives were refurbished by the exporter, not the importer. However, conscious fault is not a compulsory condition in the finding of infringement. Any act breaking the law, either consciously or unconsciously, must be sanctioned. Such regulation is also to prevent circumstances in which violators disingenuously raise “unconscious fault” to excuse their violation.

As a result, customs agreed with the brand owner’s position and imposed a fine of VND 78 million (approximately USD 3,500) on the importer for the import of trademark-infringing products.

Destruction or Removal of Infringing Elements

Another fundamental concern of the case was how to deal with the infringing drives. Article 11.17 of Decree No. 99/2013/ND-CP of the Government on sanctioning of administrative violations in industrial property sets out two remedial measures for infringing goods, namely destruction and removal of infringing elements. Under Article 4.2(d) of Circular 11, the more serious measure of destruction can be applied if: (1) the infringing elements cannot be removed from the goods; or (2) the removal is not able to completely prevent future infringement.

In this case, the infringing elements could not be removed from the hard drives due to the technical design. In addition, the drives had already been refurbished at least once – removal of the infringing elements could not ensure the prevention of a recurring violation. Thus, while only one of the two conditions is required for the destruction measure to be applied, these goods met both conditions. Finally, customs decided to destroy all 1,000 drives bearing the concerned trademarks.

Import of Prohibited Goods

In addition to the infringement charge, the importer was imposed an additional fine of VND 30 million (about USD 1,333) for the import of prohibited goods, as Vietnam essentially forbids the importation of any secondhand/refurbished IT products, per Decree No. 187/2013/ND-CP and Decision No. 18/2016/QD-TTg of the Prime Minister. In total, customs imposed a fine of VND 108 million (about USD 4,800) for two acts of infringement. This fine is unprecedented and considered one of the highest sanctions ever imposed by the Customs Department of Hai Phong for IP infringement.

This case shows the vital role of customs recordal and seizure in IP enforcement in Vietnam. To the best of our knowledge, this was the first time in Vietnam that a huge quantity of refurbished goods was blocked and later destroyed as a result of a trademark infringement charge in parallel with allegation of prohibited goods (refurbished IT products). The Hai Phong Customs Department’s decisions are expected to be obvious precedents for cases related to suspension of the clearance of goods in the future.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 28, 2026
When considering a franchise, many people first think of a restaurant, retail chain, or service outlet. From a legal perspective, however, the foundation of every franchise lies in the right to use a brand, which is typically granted through a trademark license. Trademarks are often the most valuable assets in a franchise system. Through a trademark license, a franchisor authorizes a franchisee to use its trademarks, logos, and branding while maintaining control over how the brand is presented to customers. The Role of Trademarks in Franchise Businesses Under the Trademark Law 2019, a mark is defined as a sign that is capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of others in the course of trade. This distinguishing function is particularly important in a franchise arrangement, where the franchisee’s use of the franchisor’s trademark allows consumers to recognize the source, quality, and reputation of the business. In this way, trademarks help preserve brand identity, strengthen market recognition, and protect the commercial value of the franchise system. Legal Foundation for Franchise Brand Protection Myanmar presently does not have a specific statutory framework governing franchise arrangements. As a result, franchise agreements are generally regulated under the broader applicable legal framework, including the Contract Act 1872, the Trademark Law 2019, the Competition Law 2015, the Consumer Protection Law 2019, and the relevant implementing rules and regulations. The licensing of trademarks within a franchise arrangement is particularly governed by the Trademark Law 2019. Franchisors should ensure that the trademarks intended to be licensed to franchisees in Myanmar are registered under the Trademark Law 2019 and that the relevant trademark license is properly recorded with the Intellectual Property Department (IPD). Trademark License Recordal Under the Trademark Law 2019, the owner of a registered trademark may grant a license to another
Read More
August 27, 2026
It is generally understood that patents are granted for new designs that have not been widely known or used in Thailand and not been disclosed anywhere prior to the date of the patent application. It is trite law that design law protects the distinctive appearance or products. Under Section 3 of the Thai Patent Act B.E. 2522, as amended by the Patent Act (No. 2) B.E. 2535 and the Patent Act (No. 3) B.E. 2542, a design is defined as “any form or composition of lines or colors that gives a product a special appearance and can serve as a pattern for an industrial or handicraft product.” This raises an important question. Can a patent be issued for a product design that contains text, numerals, trademarks, or symbols that do not fall under the definition of a design? This issue commonly arises when attempting to register packaging, labels, and graphical user interfaces (GUIs). Until a few years ago, applicants could file design applications with the Thai Patent Office for designs that contained such elements, provided that an appropriate disclaimer was included. This practice was generally accepted by Thai design examiners at that time, but the Patent Office has since implemented a change in its practice that could have a significant impact on applicants for design patents. Where design representations are submitted as line drawings or computer-aided design (CAD) drawings, the examiner may now issue an office action requiring their removal. This practice, however, appears to be applied inconsistently, as some examiners still exercise their own discretion in determining whether drawings containing these elements are acceptable. Below are examples of a GUI design, a CAD drawing design, and a photographic design representation that illustrates issues relating to the presence of nonallowable elements. GUI design For this GUI design, the submitted
Read More
August 27, 2026
Franchising in Thailand has matured into a sizeable commercial sector, but the rules governing franchisor–franchisee relationships remain scattered across general legislation rather than consolidated in a dedicated franchise statute. In this environment, the decisions of the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) have emerged as valuable practical guidance. Thailand follows a civil-law system in which judicial and administrative decisions do not create binding precedent; however, past rulings are nonetheless influential. This article examines the most instructive recent TCCT decisions and distills the practical compliance considerations for franchisors and franchisees operating in Thailand. Postcontract Changes: Justified or Unfair? A recurring issue is whether a franchisor may alter the terms of engagement after contract execution. The TCCT has established that midterm modifications are not inherently unfair; the determinative factors are whether there was a reasonable business justification, adequate advance notice, and a transparent process. In a 2023 coffee franchise matter, for instance, the TCCT declined to find a violation where a franchisor increased raw material prices, noting the increase had been communicated in advance and supported by demonstrable cost pressures. A bubble tea franchise matter reinforces this principle. The TCCT found that postcontract mandatory purchases of branded syrup and flavorings were justified, as the agreement reserved the franchisor’s right to modify product requirements, the materials were sold at or below market prices, and the branded ingredients possessed distinctive qualities deemed essential to franchise quality. The complaint was dismissed, with the additional requirements characterized as a legitimate measure to preserve brand consistency. Considered together, these decisions indicate that post‑contract modifications will be evaluated against three criteria: (1) whether there is a legitimate business rationale, (2) whether adequate advance notice was provided, and (3) whether franchisees were treated equitably throughout the transition. Discriminatory Treatment: Are Renewals and Information Equal? A 2024 automotive dealership
Read More
August 20, 2026
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has released the latest edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand, providing an overview of the legal, regulatory, and commercial considerations for companies establishing or expanding operations in Thailand. The 2026 edition offers practical insight into the country’s business environment, investment framework, and operational requirements. The guide covers a wide range of topics relevant to foreign and domestic investors, including: Investment incentives and promotion schemes Financial facilities and banking regulations Exchange controls and money transfers Import and export regulations Business structures and incorporation options Requirements for establishing a business Operational and compliance considerations Business cessation and insolvency procedures Employment and labor laws Taxation Immigration and visa requirements Prepared by Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers across multiple practice areas, the publication outlines key aspects of doing business in Thailand, including foreign investment restrictions, regulatory compliance obligations, corporate structures, employment requirements, and recent legal and economic developments affecting investors. The publication forms part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series, a global collection of jurisdiction-specific reference materials prepared by member firms around the world. Together, these guides help companies evaluate opportunities, compare regulatory environments, and plan international business activities across multiple markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand 2026 is available through the button below.
Read More