ENFORCEMENT
2h1EjNw
2h1EjNw
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property Enforcement<br />
unknowingly) from the trade in counterfeit and pirated<br />
goods, and partner with these entities to pass costs onto<br />
the infringers.<br />
The policy focus is two-fold: to minimize costs borne<br />
by taxpayers and right holders and, equally as important,<br />
to identify opportunities to implement policies that<br />
dis-incentivize practices that may support illicit trade in<br />
counterfeit goods, while incentivizing the adoption of<br />
best practices to increase accountability in the global<br />
shipping trade. The aim is to have the infringers held<br />
liable for storage and destruction costs and, whenever the<br />
identity of the infringer is unknown or the infringer refuses<br />
to pay such costs, to encourage and empower “economic<br />
operators” involved in the trade in infringing goods, such<br />
as carriers, to pass the costs onto the infringer by way of<br />
existing contractual relationships. 39<br />
Incentivizing Carriers to Address Costs Associated<br />
with Violative Shipments from their Customers<br />
United States. Consideration will be given to<br />
opportunities to develop voluntary practices<br />
with shippers to curb counterfeiters’ abuse of<br />
their transport networks, including by way of an<br />
assessment of, for example, the role of enhanced<br />
due diligence and “Know Your Customer”<br />
processes, especially for new exporters in<br />
problem markets with little to no trading history.<br />
ACTION NO. 3.27: Engagement with<br />
international community to consider measures<br />
to hold responsible entities accountable. The<br />
U.S. Interagency Strategy Planning Committees<br />
on IP Enforcement, along with other interested<br />
Federal offices and agencies, will consider<br />
opportunities for appropriate bilateral and<br />
multilateral dialogue, including in international<br />
fora such as the WCO, to promote a global<br />
approach to more effectively shifting costs to<br />
the illicit trader, working with transportation<br />
intermediaries to identify opportunities to<br />
promote exporter accountability.<br />
SECTION 3<br />
Carriers have a contractual relationship with, and<br />
financially benefit from, the entity (i.e., exporter,<br />
importer-of-record, etc.) engaged in illicit trade.<br />
These intermediaries are well positioned to<br />
pass costs and penalties onto their respective<br />
customers by way of contractual obligations,<br />
including, for example, by imposition of fines,<br />
escrow and security deposits, and the like,<br />
especially on behalf of importers/exporters with<br />
no verifiable trade history.<br />
Stronger cooperation between governments, right<br />
holders, and intermediaries—including land, air, and<br />
sea transport operators—may facilitate the effective<br />
identification of entities engaged in illicit activity, as well<br />
as provide opportunities for cost recovery.<br />
ACTION NO. 3.26: Assess opportunities to<br />
shift storage and destruction costs to entities<br />
involved in the trade in infringing goods.<br />
DHS will assess the state of U.S. storage and<br />
destructions costs, and provide recommendations<br />
to the U.S. Interagency Strategy Planning<br />
Committees on IP Enforcement, and other<br />
appropriate Federal Government stakeholders,<br />
on how to shift the burden away from the<br />
Government (or rights holders) to the illicit trader<br />
that is directing the violative shipments into the<br />
5. Dispose of Infringing Goods in an<br />
Environmentally-Friendly Manner.<br />
The growth in trade of counterfeit and pirated<br />
goods, coupled with the increasing effectiveness of<br />
customs authorities in detecting and confiscating<br />
infringing products, has given rise to new logistical<br />
and environmental dimensions as larger amounts<br />
of counterfeit goods are interdicted every year. The<br />
question of how to responsibly dispose of counterfeit<br />
items is particularly challenging with electronic,<br />
chemical, and pharmaceutical counterfeiting. 40<br />
The storage and environmentally-sound disposal of<br />
large quantities of illicit goods in hundreds of locations<br />
around the world presents a logistical challenge for<br />
governments and customs administrations everywhere.<br />
There is increasing recognition of the need to dispose<br />
of these goods in a safe and environmentally-sensitive<br />
way, which is resulting in adoption of disposal and<br />
destruction procedures that are more technically<br />
complex, costly, and onerous for governments and<br />
rights holders. 41<br />
The disposal of confiscated goods implicates two<br />
primary concerns: (1) the need to protect the IP owner<br />
and consumer alike from the existence of unlawful trade<br />
in fraudulent goods, while simultaneously depriving the<br />
112