Professional counterfeiting will be curbed： complaints that are not aimed at consumption will not be accepted.

　　● Occupational claims have affected businesses, platforms, regulatory authorities, judicial departments and other parties, undermined the market business environment, and encroached on judicial law enforcement resources for consumers’ legitimate rights protection.

　　● The market supervision and management department will not accept complaints that are not caused by purchasing or using commodities or receiving services for daily consumption, or that cannot prove that there is a dispute between consumers and the respondent.

　　● It may be difficult to determine whether a natural person buys, uses goods or receives services for the purpose of living or making profits. It is suggested to amend the Consumer Protection Law or clarify it in relevant judicial interpretations.

　　□ Our reporter Zhang Wei

　　In the name of "counterfeiting", the door to making profits through malicious complaints will be closed from next month.

　　Recently, the State Administration of Market Supervision issued the Interim Measures for Handling Complaints and Reports in Market Supervision and Management (hereinafter referred to as the Interim Measures), which clearly stipulates that the market supervision and management department will not accept complaints initiated by "not buying or using goods or receiving services for the needs of daily consumption, or not proving that there is a dispute between consumers and the respondent".

　　"This provision not only conforms to the provisions of the Consumer Protection Law on the definition of consumers, but also closes the complaint door of so-called professional claimants for profit, and can also reduce the burden on the regulatory authorities." Qiu Baochang, an expert from the Expert Committee of China Consumers Association, told the reporter of Legal Daily.

　　The Interim Measures shall come into force as of January 1, 2020.

　　Counterfeiting becomes counterfeiting, which damages the business environment.

　　Professional counterfeiting seems to be beneficial to consumers, but it is not.

　　The reporter of "Legal Daily" has previously found in many places that the routine of professional counterfeiting is getting deeper and deeper, and even shows a trend of gang, specialization, scale and stylization, which is embodied in mentoring, training and output, and focusing on packaging and publicity defects.

　　In recent years, professional counterfeiting has developed the trend of professional claims. "Professional anti-counterfeiting should have helped government departments to purify the market environment, and be good ‘ Woodpecker ’ But now a large number of professional claimants are completely for their own profit, regardless of whether the market environment is purified or not, not to solve problems. " A person in charge of the consumer protection department of a certain market supervision bureau who did not want to be named said.

　　According to reports, the resources consumed by professional claims are four to five times that of normal complaints, and public resources are squandered by a few gangs, which makes it impossible to deal with problems that really affect consumers and market order.

　　Occupational claims are even more damaging to the business environment. In recent years, due to the low cost and great benefits, e-commerce platform has become a new "stage" for professional claimants. Even if it is found that it is "wronged" the store, the removal and closure of the store have caused irreversible losses to the merchants.

　　Dealing with professional claimants is a nightmare for online shop owner Xiao Li for a long time. A product sold in its shop was complained to the market supervision department by a buyer who had just registered for a short time and had zero reputation evaluation because of the description flaw in the label. "I hope you understand that it is better to do more than one thing … … The price you open, I cancel ",the purpose of this buyer is obviously not simple. After receiving the money, in order to show "integrity", he sent Xiao Li a screenshot of his cancellation on the complaint platform. Xiao Li found that the buyer also complained about at least 30 companies.

　　It is worth noting that such counterfeiting is often fake, and its means are even more fraudulent. By means of customized fake identification books, quality inspection reports, hospital certificates, etc., the sellers are threatened, and the merchants are ignorant of the law and afraid of trouble, and they often succeed.

　　Many parties called for curbing the frequent occurrence of governance documents.

　　With the social harmfulness of occupational claims becoming increasingly prominent, the voice of curbing occupational claims is getting higher and higher.

　　Just at the 2019 Internet Law Conference held not long ago, the Malicious Claims Industry Observation Report (hereinafter referred to as the Report) was released. According to the Report, professional claims have affected businesses, platforms, regulatory authorities, judicial departments and other parties, undermined the market business environment, and encroached on the judicial law enforcement resources for consumers’ legitimate rights protection.

　　The Report pointed out that, unlike professional counterfeiting, "professional claims" often resort to extortion in the name of counterfeiting. The general path is "one buy, two talk, three report, four review and five lawsuit". In addition, "professional claims" are showing the trend of gang, youth and industrialization.

　　According to public information, in the past four years, nearly 40 NPC deputies have put forward suggestions to standardize occupational claims. For example, Chu Xiaoqin, a deputy to the National People’s Congress, put forward at the two sessions of the National People’s Congress in 2018 that the motive of "professional claims" is not to purify the market, but to use punitive damages to make profits for themselves or take the opportunity to extort money from merchants. Some behaviors seriously violate the principle of good faith, ignore judicial authority and waste judicial resources. Therefore, she suggested gradually curbing the profit-making counterfeiting of professional claims.

　　Since the beginning of this year, the central government’s governance documents on occupational claims have also been issued frequently. On May 20th, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council issued the Opinions on Deepening Reform and Strengthening Food Safety, stating that "malicious reporting of illegal profits should be severely cracked down according to law".

　　On August 8th, the General Office of the State Council issued the Guiding Opinions on Promoting the Healthy Development of Platform Economy, demanding to effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of participants in the platform economy and crack down on extortion in the name of "counterfeiting".

　　"Standardizing profitability according to law ‘ Counterfeiting ’ And claims. " On September 6th, the State Council issued the Guiding Opinions on Strengthening and Standardizing Post-event Supervision, which also made this clear.

　　In its reply to Li Changqing, a representative of the National People’s Congress, at the end of August this year, the General Administration of Market Supervision made it clear that occupational claims have deviated from the legislative intent of the civil punitive damages system stipulated by laws such as the Consumer Protection Law, and will cooperate with the Ministry of Justice to issue the Regulations on the Implementation of the Consumer Protection Law as soon as possible, so as to specify in detail that defects such as advertising, labeling and instructions that do not affect the quality of goods or services and will not mislead consumers are not fraudulent acts.

　　In addition, in the reply, the General Administration of Market Supervision also revealed that the regulations being drafted will regulate malicious complaints and reports according to law.

　　It is still difficult to identify that it is recommended to modify the elimination method.

　　Today, the "Interim Measures" have landed.

　　For example, as promised by the General Administration of Market Supervision at the beginning, the Interim Measures responded to the opinions on the regulation of malicious reporting complaints, and clearly stipulated that the market supervision and management department would not accept the complaints initiated by "not buying or using goods or receiving services for the needs of daily consumption, or failing to prove that there is a dispute over the rights and interests of consumers with the respondent".

　　Qiu Baochang believes that this provision is a highlight of the interim measures. It is worth noting that the promulgation process of this regulation should not be easy. It is the latest result after the General Administration of Market Supervision publicly solicited opinions from the public twice within five months.

　　The General Administration of Market Supervision publicly solicited opinions from the public twice in May and September this year. Recently, the General Administration of Market Supervision said in its explanation of the adoption of public opinions that the second public consultation received 280 feedback opinions from all walks of life, mainly focusing on the scope of regulation adjustment, the regulation of malicious reporting and complaints, and the procedural provisions of reporting.

　　In terms of real-name reporting and notification procedures, the Interim Measures stipulate that informants should provide specific clues suspected of violating market supervision and management laws, regulations and rules, and be responsible for the authenticity of the reported content. Encourage internal personnel of operators to report suspected illegal acts of operators according to law. If the informant reports with his real name, the market supervision and management department with the handling authority shall also inform the informant within five working days from the date of making a decision on whether to file a case.

　　Qiu Baochang, while affirming the significance of the Interim Measures, reminded that it may be difficult to determine whether the complaints of natural persons with no marks on their faces are for the purpose of living or for profit, and it is suggested to amend the Consumer Protection Law or make it clear in relevant judicial interpretations.

　　"We should not only protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, but also close the channels for professional claimants who do not aim at the needs of life at all. At the same time, we should open the door to reward and report, and encourage the public to get corresponding rewards through reporting." Qiu Baochang said.