[2] Compiled from: The Paper, Lianjie Weibai

[3] Today is March 15, International Consumer Rights Day, with terms like "consumer rights" and "anti-counterfeiting" trending on hot searches. Speaking of anti-counterfeiting, we must mention early this year when renowned professional anti-counterfeiter Wang Hai first exposed that the bird's nest sold by Kuaishou streamer Xin Ba was actually sugar water, and later reported that the "Pierre Cardin wool sweater" sold by Luo Yonghao was counterfeit. This not only led Xin Ba to face over 60 million yuan in compensation but also forced Luo Yonghao to admit the wool sweater was indeed fake, making it a sensational event at the start of the year.

[4] Professional anti-counterfeiters have always been a controversial profession. Today, the author will analyze through a case whether buying fake goods knowingly is an act of justice or a pursuit of ill-gotten gains.

Case Review

[5] 1. Four individuals sentenced in first trial for "knowingly buying fake goods"

[6] After learning that purchasing "problematic" food could lead to compensation from supermarkets, Meng Qing, Li Jin, Liu Jiao, and Cao Min began collaborating. They searched for expired food in supermarkets in Tianjin. Once they found expired items, they immediately purchased them and then sought compensation from the supermarkets by threatening to report them to the Market Supervision Administration or file lawsuits in court.

On May 31, 2019, Meng Qing and three others were criminally detained by Tianjin police on suspicion of extortion after the supermarket reported their behavior of "knowingly buying counterfeit goods" and then seeking compensation. After the case was transferred to the procuratorate, the Tianjin Xiqing District People's Court initiated a public prosecution against Meng Qing, Li Jin, Liu Jiao, and Cao Min on charges of extortion.

On November 15, 2019, the Xiqing District People's Court issued a first-instance verdict, ruling that Meng Qing and the other three, with the intent of illegal possession, repeatedly extorted property from others in relatively large amounts, constituting the crime of extortion. They were sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment ranging from one year and six months to six months. Additionally, the court ordered them to return the compensation to the affected merchants and imposed fines ranging from 50,000 yuan to 10,000 yuan.

2. Acquitted in the Second Instance

After the first-instance verdict, Meng Qing appealed to the Tianjin First Intermediate People's Court, arguing that his actions did not constitute a crime.

Meng Qing stated that consumers reporting expired food to market regulators or suing for rights protection in court are legal rights granted by the Consumer Rights Protection Law. He argued that anti-counterfeiting activists who knowingly buy fakes are also consumers, and claims for compensation within the statutory tenfold or maximum 1,000 yuan per item should be supported, not deemed as criminal extortion.

After the second-instance trial, the Tianjin First Intermediate People's Court held that Meng Qing, Li Jin, Liu Jiao, and Cao Min, with the intent of profit, knowingly bought counterfeit goods and sought compensation from supermarkets. Their actions did not meet the elements of the crime of extortion. Although improper, they could not be considered criminal. The original judgment correctly established the facts of their compensation from supermarkets but applied the law incorrectly. The Tianjin First Intermediate People's Court acquitted Meng Qing and the original defendants Li Jin, Liu Jiao, and Cao Min.

　　​

Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Disputes over Food and Drug Cases

Article 3

Where a dispute arises due to quality issues of food or drugs, and the purchaser asserts rights against the producer or seller, if the producer or seller defends on the ground that the purchaser knowingly purchased the food or drug despite being aware of its quality issues, the people's court shall not support such defense.

[4] Author's Opinion

From the above legal provisions and relevant judicial principles, it can be seen that in the current stage, acts of knowingly purchasing counterfeit goods or professional anti-counterfeiting practices in the fields of food and drugs are not prohibited by law. That is to say, in these two fields, professional anti-counterfeiters are also considered consumers.

However, different situations still exist in trials across various regions.

1. A judgment from the Guangdong Provincial High People's Court held that a consumer is a concept relative to sellers and producers. Only those who purchase, use goods, or receive services in market transactions for personal or household needs, rather than for production, business, or professional activities, can be identified as consumers "for the purpose of daily consumption" and are protected under the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests.

2. A judgment from the Henan Provincial High People's Court indicated that a "professional counterfeit fighter," who knowingly purchases products with issues not for consumption but for profit through litigation, does not qualify as a consumer "purchasing, using goods, or receiving services for the purpose of daily consumption" as defined in Article 2 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests.

3. A judgment from the Hefei Intermediate People's Court in Anhui Province held that Article 6 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Food and Drug Disputes stipulates that food producers and sellers bear the burden of proof that the food meets quality standards. A certain aquatic product company in Qingdao failed to provide evidence that the food in question met quality standards and could not prove that the absence of a food label did not affect food safety or mislead consumers. Therefore, Zhao's claim for ten times the price compensation from the Qingdao aquatic product company had factual and legal basis, and the court supported it.

　　……

4. In summary, although professional counterfeit fighters use the method of knowingly purchasing counterfeit goods to gain profits, their status remains in an awkward position, with courts across regions delivering completely opposite judgments. Therefore, the author believes that legislation should be enacted as soon as possible to determine the status and legality of professional counterfeit fighters, which is not only to better protect market development but also to ensure the accuracy of judicial rulings.

　　​​​​​