The Customs, &, My Dilemma Climbing the K2 Peak!

 

This is just my personal opinion!

Let the entire Trademark database be connected to the Customs Database. So instead of individual registrations for the generation of Specific Registration numbers, let the custom’s intelligence portal be prompted with the similar IP at the time of any trade or transaction, and then, an automatic suspension of goods would be issued, giving either or both the parties (means one who is the true owner, and the one whose goods being put on hold), a chance to reply within the period of 48 hours, if in case either of the party wants to carry forward such an action. But there’re three main issues that would be huge problem:

1.     Who would indemnify initially to the officials?

2.     Who would bear the cost for this entire process initially?

3.     Who would pay for the holding & disposal?

In any case, the first point would remain in effect implicitly, just alike in any case for any other official, so no indemnity bond would be needed at that time.

The second point is important as who pays for the cost of the initial delay? The answer may be to have a buffer period of time, let’s say for 48 hours? Maybe!

The third part is who would pay for seizure of goods in case the case is made out! Now, this is carry forward from point 2. If either of the party affirms that the goods may remain in the suspended state, then in that case, that party instantly within the period of 24 hours execute Bond of the cost, decided at the administrative level. But, if in case either of the party doesn’t reply to the notice within the period of 48 hours, then in that case, goods held would be released, as kept in the buffer time period.

But one more dilemma comes herein. What about the perishable goods? What about the medical equipment and medicines needed urgently? That needs to be addressed, as this was also included in my dilemma!

But there’s one more issue! What would happen if both the parties are the registered proprietors of the same trademark? Then in that case, no action should be taken, and thus being communicated to both the proprietors to go back to the Tribunal or the Courts, to first sort out as who being the prior adopter and user, and due to this reason, the seized goods would be released.

Am I missing something? Can my dilemma fall from the K2, or, could it really climb on the top. That needs to be addressed, which, a humble poet and blogger, cannot determine, right now! 😊

© Pranav Chaturvedi