"The ancient method of hand-made pots has been passed down for a century." In the video, a man named "Ito Keita" dressed in work clothes often worn by Japanese craftsmen, with a smile on his face, spoke in Japanese: "This kind of The texture of the iron pot has not lagging behind the times. This is a heritage of ingenuity."

Before "rolling over", OnePlus Life sales page

　　The handle of the iron wok is engraved with the words "Made in Japan" in English, and the product label shows that the manufacturer is "Ito Manufacturing Co., Ltd. of Japan" located in Pinewood, Imizu City, Toyama Prefecture, Japan.

　　However, one day in December 2020, the iron pot warehouse in Minhang, Shanghai was closed down by the Market Supervision Bureau of Minhang District, Shanghai in one fell swoop.

　　What's wrong behind this pot?

Is there really a Japanese craftsman in the video?

　　The reporter's investigation found that in the summer of 2019, OnePlus Life, whose registered address is in Quanzhou, Fujian, began to sell iron pots on e-commerce platforms such as Tmall.

　　According to OnePlus's description, around 1892, the original founder "Hotaka Ito" was attracted by the charm of casting tools and embarked on the road of apprenticeship. The subsequent generations continued to carry forward their skills and won the "Japanese Intangible Heritage" repeatedly in the past century. Honors such as "Traditional Craft Award", "Osaka Cultural Award", and "Japanese Craftsman".

　　Although the price is between 800 and 1400 yuan, the "Ito family" made pots for four generations, and the concept of "only one thing in one life" has impressed many netizens, and iron pots are selling well.

　　At the end of 2020, the iron pot of "Ito Keita" was exposed on Weibo as a domestic foundry production. "Ito Keita" is indeed a Chinese actor.

　　The Shanghai Minhang District Market Supervision Bureau stated that it received a report on December 10, 2020 that Shanghai OnePlus related companies were suspected of conducting false propaganda through online stores and selling counterfeit cookware.

Law enforcement officers checked overnight and took administrative coercive measures on the products involved in the sale.

　　According to conservative estimates of e-commerce platform sales, as of December 2020, the total sales of iron pots exceeded 30 million yuan.

The reporter's investigation found that the photos of the so-called "first generation" founder and "second generation" inheritor of the iron pot in the promotional video of OnePlus were actually photos of the Japanese novelist Naoya Shiga and the sculptor Kotaro Takamura.

Shiga Naoya and Kotaro Takamura were both born in 1883.

　　The hot-selling iron pan has thus "turned over".

However, follow-up investigations found that after the incident, the road to consumer rights protection is still difficult to get through.

What responsibilities should the businesses and actors involved in the incident bear to consumers?

Who should "carry" this "pot"?

Merchants avoid "refunding one for three"

　　Some consumers encountered resistance when refunding, some were "blocked" by OnePlus customer service, and some asked how to refund but were told not to "spread rumors" or "rumors".

　　Wang Haogong, the executive director of the Shaanxi Lawyers Association, believes that by claiming that it sells iron pots made by the fourth-generation descendants of the Ito family, the false statement that it sells has caused consumers to fall into a misunderstanding, and based on this, they have a wrong understanding of the actual cause. The iron pan produced by the foundry was purchased.

　　Wang Haogong believes that the behavior meets the definition of fraud in the Consumer Rights Protection Law, and consumers can require OnePlus to perform the legal obligation of "refunding one for three compensations" according to law.

　　Article 55 of the Consumer Protection Law stipulates that if a business operator commits a fraudulent act in providing goods or services, it shall implement a "refund of one compensation for three".

　　Many consumers said in an interview that OnePlus refused to perform the "refund of one compensation for three" and could only send the pot back to refund the purchase cost.

Some consumers also said that OnePlus customer service refused to return the product on the grounds that the iron pot had been used, and the e-commerce platform stepped in to refund.

Customer service's response to customer inquiries

　　According to He Jian, assistant professor at Peking University Law School, taking into account the resistance of OnePlus’ self-negotiation of "refunding one compensation for three", according to the Consumer Protection Law, it can request consumer associations to organize mediation, complain to market supervision and other administrative departments, and file with the people’s court. litigation.

When consumers encounter "difficulty in defending their rights"

　　It is indeed time-consuming and labor intensive to collect evidence for a pot of thousands of dollars.

　　"The price positioning standard of about 1,000 yuan per pot shows that the merchants are exhausted and precise positioning." According to Yao Haifang, associate professor of the School of Law of Renmin University of China, the pricing standard that is several times higher than that of ordinary iron pots is aimed at relatively high income. Consumer groups, but if they have to spend a lot of effort to protect their legitimate rights and interests, they may stop here.

　　Yao Haifang believes that in response to complicated litigation procedures and lack of energy to deal with, the Consumer Protection Law also stipulates that the China Consumer Association and consumer associations established in provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities can be used for acts that infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of many consumers. File a lawsuit in the people's court.

Online shopping platforms should actively assist consumers in defending their rights

　　The reporter's investigation found that many e-commerce platforms provide independent return channels, but they do not provide consumers with the option of "return one for three" when buying non-compliant products.

　　Some consumers said that this indirectly increases the cost of consumer rights protection.

Some experts also pointed out that if the platform can realize the option of "refunding one compensation for three", the premise is to invest a lot of investigation costs, which also makes it difficult to implement the measure.

　　The E-commerce Law stipulates that e-commerce platform operators shall actively assist consumers in safeguarding their legitimate rights and interests; in the handling of e-commerce disputes, e-commerce operators shall provide original contracts and transaction records.

　　Ge Jiangqiu, a lecturer at Fudan University Law School, suggested that platform operators should establish an evidence preservation mechanism and a clue providing mechanism for consumer rights protection, and form an effective linkage with market supervision departments. When consumers need relevant consumption evidence, the platform should actively cooperate in providing evidence .

Advertising endorsements and false propaganda must also be held accountable

　　In recent years, incidents where actors endorse and product problems have occurred from time to time. Most of them ended up with actor ignorance and inadequate understanding of the product.

And what about Huaiyuan, the actor who played the Japanese craftsman with "Wellness"?

　　He Jian believed that Huaiyuan, as an advertising spokesperson, deliberately made false propaganda and should bear corresponding civil and administrative responsibilities.

At the level of civil liability, Article 56 of the Advertising Law stipulates that an advertising spokesperson who has caused consumer harm, knowing or ought to know that the advertisement is false but still designs, produces, represents, publishes, or recommends or proves it shall bear joint liability with the advertiser.

Specific to this case, Huaiyuan should jointly bear the responsibility of "refunding one compensation and three compensation" together with OnePlus.

　　At the level of administrative responsibility, Article 62 of the Advertising Law stipulates that if you know or should know that the advertisement is false and still recommends and proves the goods or services in the advertisement, the illegal income shall be confiscated by the market supervision department, and the illegal income shall be more than one time and less than two times. Fine.

The business may constitute a criminal offence

　　The Market Supervision Bureau of Minhang District, Shanghai stated that it has filed an investigation on the parties involved. Because of the inter-provincial and municipalities, the source, sales, product quality, publicity and production of the products involved in the case are still in the process of further investigation and will continue to crack down on infringements in accordance with the law. Intellectual property rights and the production and sale of counterfeit and shoddy goods further protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.

　　Administrative law enforcement agencies are investigating, and whether the merchants and foundries bear other legal responsibilities?

Also aroused the attention and discussion of experts.

　　According to the Criminal Law, producers and sellers who adulterate or adulterate products, use fake products as genuine, substandard products or substandard products as qualified products, shall be sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment or imprisonment for sales of more than 2 million yuan. Life imprisonment and a fine of more than 50% but not more than two times the sales amount or confiscation of property.

　　In an interview with reporters, relevant experts from the public security department stated that it is difficult to hold OnePlus and its foundry accountable in accordance with the above regulations, because in this case, OnePlus fabricated a non-existent Japanese brand, whether it was adulterated or adulterated, or whether it was adulterated or adulterated. Fake fake products, pretend to be inferior products or substandard products as qualified products, is open to discussion.

　　Yao Haifang believes that if Tmall and JD.com provide OnePlus sales data, or a considerable number of consumers collectively submit purchase vouchers, it is still feasible for the public security organs to initiate a criminal investigation.

　　What is the real product?

What is a qualified product?

In this regard, Luo Xiang, a professor at the School of Criminal Justice of China University of Political Science and Law, believes that this case can at least be attacked in accordance with the crime of fraud in the criminal law.

"The essence of this case is deception. It lied to create a story about a Japanese pot. By allowing consumers to make mistakes in understanding and wrongly dispose of their property, the pot worth one or two hundred yuan was sold for one thousand yuan."

　　A small pot, the matter is big.

In the online shopping market, how many products resemble shoddy products, fake stories, fictional stories, and "ingenuity" interpretations?

In the face of all kinds of chaos, in addition to keeping consumers' eyes open, e-commerce companies, administrative law enforcement and other departments should shoulder their responsibilities and form a joint force to become a barrier when consumers buy and a backing when they defend their rights.

　　Only by letting the teeth of supervision really bite together, the sword of punishment can effectively deter lawbreakers, and the road of consumer rights protection is smoother, can we build a tight line of defense against counterfeit and shoddy products.

The trust of consumers and a clear market environment should be left to true ingenuity.

　　Reporter: Zhai Xiang, Cheng Siqi, Xiong Feng, produced by Xinhua News Agency