Longines, a watch brand owned by the Swatch Group, issued a statement on Weibo today, claiming that ‘there is no cost-effective cooperation with any Weibo, WeChat, group buying sites, and Taobao Ju.’ Many Longines fake watches, in order to protect their own interests, it is recommended that netizens go to regular brand authorized retail stores to buy, and Longines has not yet opened any online stores.
Longines statement Weibo screenshot
No Fashion Chinese searched for “Longines” keywords on both Jingdong Mall and Taobao and found that a large number of Longines watches were sold on the two e-commerce websites. Among them, Jingdong Mall displayed 1696 items, while Taobao had sales of more than 100 in several decades Shop of block Longines watches.
Domestic e-commerce websites have been suffering from the failure of international brands to authorize. Prior to this, multiple brands including Armani issued a statement on this, but various international brand sales can still be seen on domestic e-commerce websites without exception, JD.com B2C e-commerce websites and other brands have indicated that the international brands they sell are genuine, but they are vague about their supply channels.
At the beginning of June, some netizens complained on Weibo that L’Oréal SA (OR: PAR) sold by JD.com’s Kiehl’s 250ml cucumber plant essence toner was fake, and sent a comparison chart on Weibo to the same product purchased by JD.com. . Earlier, some media reported that 80% of the cosmetics sold by e-commerce were fake. L’Oreal, Estee Lauder and other cosmetics groups have not authorized domestic e-commerce for their cosmetics. Even eBay, Net-a-Porter and other well-known international e-commerce companies do not have the authorization of cosmetics giants, because e-commerce competition depends on price differences. Will lead to the difference between counters and online shopping, making consumers inclined to e-commerce, which will have an impact on tens of thousands of counter retail channels for cosmetics.
Regarding the issue of authorization, another famous case is Cartier Brand Litigation No. 1 Store, Compagnie Financière Richemont SA (CFR.VX) in July 2012. Richemont Cartier Brand Litigation No. 1 Store Operator Shanghai Yishiduo E-commerce Co., Ltd. And Beijing Huixin Tianyuan Technology and Trade Co., Ltd. and Beijing Mengcra Technology Co., Ltd. infringed trademark rights and unfair competition. The case was ruled in early April. The Shanghai Pudong New District People’s Court ruled on Monday that the three defendants would stop infringing the exclusive right of Cartier, a registered trademark 2. Compensation for 180,000 yuan.