Case 2 Summary: 1996 12 A city post office sells a batch of pagers and entrusts an advertising company to advertise. The advertising company published this advertisement in an abstract newspaper, which stated the origin of the pager in Japan, and the price was 1200 yuan. Liu saw it in the newspaper and went to the post office to buy one. Later, it was found that the logo of the purchased pager read "MADE IN CHINA" (made in China). Liu believes that the Abstract newspaper published false advertisements to deceive consumers and demanded a refund of their shopping money. Abstract newspaper refused, on the grounds that it didn't sell pagers and should be handled by the post office. Liu appealed to the court. After investigation, the post office did not provide the advertising company and the abstract newspaper with the pager quality certificate issued by the quality inspection agency. Comments: This case involves the obligation of advertising agents and publishers to review relevant documents that prove the authenticity of advertising content. Article 24 of the Advertising Law stipulates: "An advertiser who designs, produces and publishes an advertisement by himself or by entrusting others shall have or provide the following authentic, legal and effective documents: (1) a business license and other documents proving the qualification for production and operation; (two) the certification documents issued by the quality inspection agency that the advertising content involves the quality of goods; (3) Other documents confirming the authenticity of the advertising content. " Article 27 stipulates that advertising agents and publishers have the obligation to check and verify the certification documents of advertisers. If the certification is incomplete or untrue, advertising operators shall not provide design, production and agency services, and advertising publishers shall not publish advertisements. In this case, the origin of the pager sold by the post office is different from that described in the advertisement. When the pager fails to provide effective proof of product quality in the advertisement, the advertising company still advertises, and the newspaper still advertises, which leads to the consequences of deceiving and misleading consumers. Therefore, the post office, advertising companies and abstract newspapers are all at fault. Article 38 of the Advertising Law stipulates: "Advertisers who publish false advertisements in violation of the provisions of this Law, deceive and mislead consumers, and damage the legitimate rights and interests of consumers in purchasing goods or receiving services shall bear civil liability according to law; Advertising agents and publishers who know or should know that they are false, design, produce and publish advertisements, shall bear joint liability according to law. " Accordingly, in this case, Xiangwen liu's claim for compensation is well-founded in law. After the newspaper bears the liability for compensation, it can solve the problem of civil liability sharing with the post office and advertising company according to law. Case 3 Summary: A new drug was produced in a pharmaceutical factory. In order to introduce new products to the public, it printed tens of thousands of advertising materials in a printing factory without the approval of relevant departments, and entrusted an advertising company to distribute them to the masses free of charge. Some consumers bought this medicine after reading the advertising materials, and found that this medicine not only had no advertised therapeutic effect, but also had great toxic and side effects, so they reported it to the relevant departments one after another. After receiving reports from consumers, relevant departments investigated and dealt with this advertising behavior. Comments: For the advertisements of drugs, medical devices, pesticides, veterinary drugs and other commodities, because they involve the national economy and people's livelihood, advertising is often carried out, and the advertising law has adopted special management measures. Article 34 of the Advertising Law stipulates: "Advertisements for drugs, medical devices, pesticides, veterinary drugs and other commodities and other advertisements that should be examined according to laws and administrative regulations should be published by radio, movies, television, newspapers, periodicals and other media. Before publication, the contents of advertisements must be examined by relevant administrative departments in accordance with the provisions of relevant laws and administrative regulations; It may not be published without review. " Article 43 stipulates: "In violation of the provisions of Article 34 of this Law, if an advertisement is published without the examination and approval of the advertising examination organ, the advertising supervision and administration organ shall order the responsible advertisers, advertising agents and advertisement publishers to stop publishing, confiscate the advertising expenses and impose a fine of not less than one time but not more than five times the advertising expenses." In this case, the pharmaceutical factory published drug advertisements in the form of newspapers without examination by the administrative department, which violated the above provisions. Therefore, the advertising supervision and administration organ shall order pharmaceutical factories, printing houses and advertising companies to stop advertising the drug, and impose fines on them.
Summary of case 4: In July, 20001year, Shijiazhuang Industrial and Commercial Bureau inspected XX Economic and Trade Co., Ltd. according to the report, and found that the company was playing a video introducing its magnetic therapy health care products in its business premises, especially introducing the use of this product by a provincial party secretary in Heilongjiang. According to the survey, the secretary of a provincial party committee in Heilongjiang doesn't know the product "Nippon Bora Laifu" at all, let alone use it. The above content in the video tape is pure fabrication. Shijiazhuang Industrial and Commercial Bureau believes that the company's behavior of playing a video to users to promote and introduce the products of Nippon Bora Fook conforms to the characteristics of advertising activities and belongs to advertising behavior: introducing the products of Nippon Bora Fook in the name of a provincial party secretary in Heilongjiang Province in the video violates the provisions of Article 4 and Article 7, paragraph 2 of the Advertising Law, and the economic and trade company is punished as follows: (1 Article 4 of China's Advertising Law stipulates: "Advertisements shall not contain false contents, and shall not deceive or mislead consumers". Paragraph 2 of Article 7 stipulates: "(Advertising shall not) use the names of state organs and state functionaries". Article 39 stipulates: "If an advertisement is published in violation of the second paragraph of Article 7 of this Law, the advertising supervision and administration organ shall order the responsible advertisers, advertising agents and advertisement publishers to stop publishing, make public corrections, confiscate the advertising expenses, and impose a fine of not less than one time but not more than five times the advertising expenses; If the circumstances are serious, the advertising business shall be stopped according to law. If it constitutes a crime, criminal responsibility shall be investigated according to law. " In this case, in order to attract customers, XX Economic and Trade Co., Ltd. used the name of a provincial party secretary in Heilongjiang without authorization in its advertisement of "Nippon Bora Foo", and it stole the name of a provincial party secretary in Heilongjiang to publicize and introduce the product content of "Nippon Bora Foo", which violated the provisions of Article 4 and Article 7, paragraph 2 of the Advertising Law and was a false advertising act. According to the provisions of Article 39 of the Advertising Law, economic and trade companies should be investigated for legal responsibility. The punishment of Shijiazhuang Industrial and Commercial Bureau is correct. Case 5 Abstract: 1996, 10 In June, Harbin No.6 Pharmaceutical Factory published VEN drug advertisements in Harbin Daily, New Evening News, Life News, Heilongjiang Morning News and Harbin Radio and Television News through Harbin Xiao Sheng Advertising Company. The contents of the advertisements include "National Patent", "Patent No.95 108535.0", "The ex-factory quality is higher than the national standard", "There are counterfeit and imitation VEN drugs produced by our factory in the market recently, so why not buy the genuine products at the same cost" and "Please identify the genuine signs of Harbin No.6 Pharmaceutical Factory and produce them exclusively". Harbin No.6 Pharmaceutical Factory paid an advertising fee of 279,380 yuan. After investigation, the VEN drug advertisement issued by Harbin No.6 Pharmaceutical Factory publicized that the patent application had obtained the national patent, and the patent application number was 95 108535.0, which was the patent number approved by the state. VEN drug advertisements are approved by the Health Department of Heilongjiang Province. Comments: This case involves the identification and release of false and illegal advertisements and the provisions of relevant legal responsibilities. According to the article 1 1 of People's Republic of China (PRC) Advertising Law, the patent number and patent type should be indicated in the advertisement, the second paragraph "Those who have not obtained the patent right shall not falsely claim to have obtained the patent right in the advertisement" and the article 12 "The advertisement shall not belittle the goods of other producers and operators or impose a fine on Harbin Pharmaceutical No.6 Factory according to the provisions of Article 40 of the Advertising Law. Harbin Xiao Sheng Advertising Company, Harbin TV Station, Harbin Daily, New Evening News Agency, Life News Agency, Heilongjiang Morning News Agency and Harbin Radio and Television Newspaper were ordered to stop publishing illegal advertisements, informed criticism, confiscation of advertising expenses, fines and other penalties. Article 45 of the Advertising Law stipulates: "If the advertising examination organ makes a decision to examine and approve the contents of illegal advertisements, the directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible personnel shall be given administrative sanctions by their units, higher authorities and administrative supervision departments according to law". According to these regulations, advertisements that should be censored according to laws and administrative regulations, such as drugs, medical devices, pesticides and veterinary drugs, are published by the mass media only after being examined by the relevant administrative departments. The examination and approval decision made by the advertising examination organ on illegal advertising content provides a legal basis for the publication of illegal advertisements, but it also damages the dignity of the advertising examination organ and must bear legal responsibility. In this case, the Health Department of Heilongjiang Province made a decision to examine and approve the contents of illegal advertisements. The directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible personnel shall be notified by the advertising supervision and management organ to the administrative department of health, and shall be given administrative sanctions by their units, higher authorities and administrative supervision departments according to law. Summary of the case:1From June 5th to June 5th, 996, Harbin No.6 Pharmaceutical Factory advertised VEN drugs in Harbin Daily, New Evening News, Life News, Heilongjiang Morning Post and Harbin Radio and Television News through Harbin Xiao Sheng Advertising Company. The contents of the advertisements include "National Patent", "Patent No.95 108535.0", "The ex-factory quality is higher than the national standard", "There are counterfeit and imitation VEN drugs produced by our factory in the market recently, so why not buy the genuine products at the same cost" and "Please identify the genuine signs of Harbin No.6 Pharmaceutical Factory and produce them exclusively". Harbin No.6 Pharmaceutical Factory paid an advertising fee of 279,380 yuan. After investigation, the VEN drug advertisement issued by Harbin No.6 Pharmaceutical Factory publicized that the patent application had obtained the national patent, and the patent application number was 95 108535.0, which was the patent number approved by the state. VEN drug advertisements are approved by the Health Department of Heilongjiang Province. Comments: This case involves the identification and release of false and illegal advertisements and the provisions of relevant legal responsibilities. According to the article 1 1 of People's Republic of China (PRC) Advertising Law, the patent number and patent type should be indicated in the advertisement, the second paragraph "Those who have not obtained the patent right shall not falsely claim to have obtained the patent right in the advertisement" and the article 12 "The advertisement shall not belittle the goods of other producers and operators or impose a fine on Harbin Pharmaceutical No.6 Factory according to the provisions of Article 40 of the Advertising Law. Harbin Xiao Sheng Advertising Company, Harbin TV Station, Harbin Daily, New Evening News Agency, Life News Agency, Heilongjiang Morning News Agency and Harbin Radio and Television Newspaper were ordered to stop publishing illegal advertisements, informed criticism, confiscation of advertising expenses, fines and other penalties. Article 45 of the Advertising Law stipulates: "If the advertising examination organ makes a decision to examine and approve the contents of illegal advertisements, the directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible personnel shall be given administrative sanctions by their units, higher authorities and administrative supervision departments according to law". According to these regulations, advertisements that should be censored according to laws and administrative regulations, such as drugs, medical devices, pesticides and veterinary drugs, are published by the mass media only after being examined by the relevant administrative departments. The examination and approval decision made by the advertising examination organ on illegal advertising content provides a legal basis for the publication of illegal advertisements, but it also damages the dignity of the advertising examination organ and must bear legal responsibility. In this case, the Health Department of Heilongjiang Province made a decision to examine and approve the contents of illegal advertisements. The directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible personnel shall be notified by the advertising supervision and management organ to the administrative department of health, and shall be given administrative sanctions by their units, higher authorities and administrative supervision departments according to law.