[IP Practice Online] Current state, challenges, and responses in Customs' border enforcement against IP-infringing goods (Attorney Kei Iida)
更新日：10月9日
Article information
Article type: Lectures and videos
Categories: Patents / Trademarks / Designs / Other Japanese law
Topics: Border enforcement / Exhaustion and parallel imports
First published on this website: 2026-10-07
Display and classification checked: 2026-10-07
[IP Practice Online] Current state, challenges, and responses in Customs' border enforcement against IP-infringing goods (Attorney Kei Iida)
Current import-suspension results for IP-infringing goods
China accounts for approximately 80% of cases by country of shipment.
Trademark rights account for 95% of cases.
The trend toward small consignments is pronounced.
Counterfeiting is becoming more sophisticated. Products with similar, rather than identical, trademarks or appearances, and unbranded copies of designs, are increasing.
Personal imports
IP infringement requires conduct “in the course of business.” However, because the person performing the importation had been interpreted as the “individual within Japan,” imports for personal use did not constitute infringement, making Customs suspension difficult.
To address this, the 2021 amendments to the Trademark Act and Design Act and the 2022 amendment to the Customs Act expressly included within importation an act by “a person in a foreign country” of “causing another person to bring goods into Japan.” Direct shipment of counterfeit goods by overseas e-commerce businesses and others consequently became subject to regulation.
⇒ If this is a clarifying provision, could the same argument be made for patents?
Exhaustion (parallel imports)
Under the 2020 amendment to the Plant Variety Protection and Seed Act, domestic exhaustion is also denied for exports to countries other than designated countries (violations of restrictions on use).
Importation of harvested material obtained from propagating material “propagated without authorization” abroad is unlawful. In Customs practice, importers are expected to be required to prove lawfulness—that the propagation was not unauthorized.
For deterrent effect, I consider that Customs should also display the status of accepted applications in foreign languages and change the current practice under which that information disappears ten days after acceptance.
https://lnkd.in/gJNnppJg
Original article (2025-11-23):
https://lnkd.in/gQ2j8MBX
Related articles
Update history
Content changes and display maintenance are recorded separately.
2026-10-07: First published from the original LinkedIn post; categories, article information, and consultation navigation added.
