Earlier within the week, two e-commerce marketplaces working in India – Snapdeal and Amazon India – have been marked out for itemizing counterfeit and pirated merchandise by the United States authorities, even as India continues to delay passing legal guidelines that can tackle the difficulty of faux items offered on-line.In truth, India has been working on two particular units of guidelines – the National E-commerce Policy and Consumer Protection (E-commerce) Rules – which have substantial bearing on the sale of counterfeit merchandise on-line.
While the primary drafts of each legislations have been launched as far again as 14 months and eight months in the past, respectively, it is not clear when they may really get handed.
The U.S. Trade Representative’s workplace, which launched its annual list of ‘Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy’ on Wednesday, mentioned one in every of its targets was to “motivate appropriate action by the private sector and governments to reduce piracy and counterfeiting.”
While Amazon India and Snapdeal each mentioned they’d made investments in expertise and manpower to weed out pretend merchandise listed on their web sites, aside from providing manufacturers instruments to inform and flag merchandise that infringe upon their rights, the lengthy delay in passing the laws has meant such initiatives have been purely voluntary.To be certain, each draft rules name for e-commerce marketplaces to obviously list particulars of the vendor, together with their identify, telephone quantity, e mail and tackle to make it simpler for manufacturers and customers to trace down sellers. They additionally set fastened deadlines inside which points surrounding sale of counterfeit merchandise should be addressed by marketplaces.
India’s law on overseas direct funding (FDI) in e-commerce, too, has a clause asking for the clear show of the identify, tackle and different contact particulars of a vendor by on-line marketplaces.
According to the US authorities report, considerations have been raised over “misleading” vendor info displayed by Amazon and that the corporate’s “counterfeit removal processes can be lengthy and burdensome”.
An Amazon spokesperson mentioned the corporate strongly disagreed with its characterization within the report.
“This purely political act is another example of the Administration using the U.S. government to advance a personal vendetta against Amazon,” the spokesperson mentioned.
Snapdeal additionally mentioned it firmly disagreed with the report’s findings.
“The comments made in the report in respect of Snapdeal are factually incorrect in most aspects, are based on unverified inputs and are defamatory in nature,” a Snapdeal spokesperson mentioned.