in two cases (January 1, 2014 , a new EU regulation concerning customs enforcement of intellectual property rights ( Article 608 / No. 2013 ) came into effect. The new regulation is directly applicable in all EU member states, and abolished the previous 1383 /2003 regulations. Just as the previous legislation , the new regulations in the EU for customs seizure of counterfeit and pirated goods boundary has a procedural requirement. However, there is not  any new regulatory requirements to confirm whether the seizure of goods infringes intellectual property rights of people. It still based on the current applicable intellectual property laws to judge.

Compared with the old rules , the new regulations strengthen the enforcement powers of the customs, so the obligee can be destroy the infringing goods  more quickly and effectively. A new central electronic database (COPIS) has been established according to the new regulations in order to facilitate the exchange of information between customs authorities of EU member states .

The new regulations include trade name and utility models

The new regulation covers certain new intellectual property not included in the old rules. Under the new regulations , the customs may detain suspected infringer's goods infringed the rights of trade names, utility models and semiconductorsmainly to enable or facilitate the circumvention technological measures designed or modified production of semiconductor products and equipment topology. However, the new regulations did not make provision for the parallel import goods, which means that customs has no authority to detain original products from distribution channels of rights holders. In addition, travelers´ non-commercial goods of personal luggage as well as trade leftover stock (obtain permission producers manufactured goods beyond the scope of the order ) is not within the powers of the Customs Enforcement .

Simplifying the procedure to destroy infringing goods

The new regulations including mandatory provisions of simplifying procedures, regulates that infringing goods can also be destroied without the court judgment . Old rules also has provisions to simplify procedures. However , the implementation of the above provisions in the old rules for the Member States concerned is not mandatory. For example, in Finland , the right hoders will not be able to use the provisions of the simplified procedure, because the legislation has never been implemented in Finland over the above requirements.

Under the new rules, if the owner or the seizure of goods transport agency has no objection to the destruction of infringing goods and the right holders have authorized the customs to destory infringement goods because their rights are being infringed, the customs have the right to destory the infringing goods after right holders  pay the  associated costs. Therefore, if the attitude of the other party in the matter is negative, then the right person is no longer obligated to obtain a court unilateral destruction of infringing goods verdict.

On the contrary, if the other party opposed the destruction, the rights holders must submit an application or criminal enforcement of intellectual property in civil court in investigating the market for infringers with negotiated settlement agreement. Market Court in Finland all have jurisdiction over intellectual property disputes .

Small pieces of cargo

Under the new rules, if the right holders authorized customs to seizure and destory small goods and the consignee of the goods detained no objection is raised within ten working days before the goods are destroyed, then  the customs have the right to seize and destroy in small piece of cargo. Small pieces of cargo are those contains three or less than three of the following items or weighing less than two kilograms of postal or courier cargo. Rights holders should bear the costs of the destruction of the goods, unless the customs in the field can easily destroy the goods.

Storage and destruction charges

Under the new rules, unless the rights holder has agreement with holders of the infringing goods or transportation agency, otherwise right holders shall bear the storage and destruction fees. Right holders can ask the other party for compensation according to Finland law.

Transhipment

In the cases involving Nokia and Philips (C-446/09 and C-495/09), the European Court held that if the parties involved in the disputed goods to hide the true identity, the customs may detain transhipment . The European Court also held that if there are indications that the seized goods may be shipped back to the EU market, the transhipment may infringe their intellectual property was seized country. Respect the ruling of the European Court of Customs seizure transhipment confusion , resulting in some EU member states and some do not detain transhipment to do so .

The new regulation does not overturn the ruling above Nokia and Philips cases. Transhipment problem will most likely be considered in modifying forthcoming " Community Trademark Regulation " proposal .

At the national trademarks , the Court has confirmed that Finland Finnish Customs seizure based on national trademark transshipment cargo and cargo in transit may infringe national trademark . The above decision was based on the current applicable laws of Finland contain more stringent than the provisions of EU law to make .

For these reasons, in addition to the Community trade mark rights holders should be registered in Finland in order to effectively destroy transhipment trademark infringement .