6 ms·
CBP has no idea what your intention is. Would you agree that a reasonable assumption that if an electronic is shipped with an AC adaptor, then that electronic
by kop316 6y ago
CBP has no idea what your intention is.
Would you agree that a reasonable assumption that if an electronic is shipped with an AC adaptor, then that electronic will be used with it?
And CBP does not have a crystal ball:
- Are you using it as is?
- If the UL marking is fake, who is to know about the entire thing?
- Are you going to resell this? If so, is the AC adaptor going with it?
- How do they know that this was an honest mistake? Do they take the your word at face value?
I could go on and on with scenarios. I get it, that is not fun. But I will ask you, what should they have done?
- tyingq 6y ago"what should they have done?" Seized the adapters. That would have been enough for me to be more careful about adapters in the future. Seizing the whole shipment hurts me, but not the supplier. See my other example here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24469959 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24469959 There's any number of things you might not expect, and the receiver is the only one hurt when they are a smaller player.
- kop316 6y agoRespectfully, how would they be able to verify that a) you are being truthful, and b) that only part of the shipment is real, when once part has been shown not to be?
- snissn 6y agoby your logic shouldn't they also seize all future shipments sent to and/or from the shipper?
- tyingq 6y agoThe main part was not a "branded" item at all. It was an LED thing where no part of the item would be listed, branded, etc. They saw them because they unboxed quite a few of them to find the adapters with the fake UL mark.
- kop316 6y agoYou seem assume that CBP will just trust you on your word alone. That's my entire point. They don't know what your intentions with this are, nor if you are being truthful.
- true_religion 6y agoIf that's true... then they should investigate, not make an assumption and simply capture all of someones valuable property. OP is inside of the US, and probably lives here as well. He's not a flight risk, and its totally reasonable to ask them to go through slow bureaucratic means to make sure they get it right. CBP acts like they are the first line in a war when really they ought to be helping people come into compliance, and track down bad suppliers.
- jacquesm 6y ago> CBP acts like they are the first line in a war Taped to the wall on the Sault Ste. Marie crossing CBP station: "We Are The First Line Of Defense"
- kop316 6y agoI think there is more to the story here than being told really. I bet they did investigate, and the poster didn't have documentation. Why are we assuming the commenter is being totally.honest?
- tyingq 6y agoWhy would I want adapters with fake UL marks? The adapter is a very small amount of the cost.
- jetru 6y agoYou can say that about pretty much anything and anyone. What is truth anyway?
- Navarr 6y agoIt doesn't matter. The burden of truth is supposed to be on the accuser. Consider if you will - a robber is caught by police in his own house. In this house, they found the items the robber stole. Should they: a) take the items the robber stole b) take everything
- relaxing 6y agoThanks to civil asset forfeiture laws, the police will in fact b) take everything.
- srtjstjsj 6y agoThat's probably covered by criminal forfeiture if the robber is convicted.
- kop316 6y agoIn a civil case like the one above, its based on a preponderance of evidence. Are you saying that when one device is fake, I should give the benefit of the doubt and assume no other is?
- srtjstjsj 6y agoAll the adapters were fake. Not the computers.
- Hydraulix989 6y agoHave you considered using a US based supplier instead?
- tyingq 6y agoThere are large categories of products, this one included, where there are ZERO remaining US suppliers. The only other country I could find with the products was Taiwan, and it wasn't 100% clear if they were just importing Chinese products. They were significantly more expensive.
- Avtomatk 6y ago>There are large categories of products, this one included, where there are ZERO remaining US suppliers. I don't know very well how patents and intellectual property protection work... But, if there are no suppliers of such a product in the United States (assuming your previous argument as true), then what product is being pirated? if there is none (worth the redundancy), to my understanding, there has to be a vendor whose product is being counterfeited within the united states for it to be taken as an infringement of intellectual property. Other than that, you were not entitled to a trial? They just confiscated everything and there it ended?
- tyingq 6y agoIt was a UL mark. Underwriters Laboratories. They are a company that tests products for electrical safety. The manufacturer of the AC adapter didn't pay for testing, but put the mark on the adapter. The adapters weren't the main thing I was importing, so I hadn't paid any attention to it in the order process. The technical reason for the seizure was trademark violation.
- Avtomatk 6y agoOh I understand, that is a really specific detail, they surely deduced that you wanted to sell them (for the amount (100)) although I am not sure if that was your intention. I think there should be a public blacklist of companies that are dedicated to piracy (because it is quite common, especially in China).
- ardy42 6y ago> Seized the adapters. That would have been enough for me to be more careful about adapters in the future. Seizing the whole shipment hurts me, but not the supplier. Where the adapters packaged separately to make that possible? Or are you asking some customs inspector to unbox all your items, remove the adapters, and repack it all?
- tyingq 6y agoThey could have me do it. Also, they do it eventually to auction off the main parts.
- zb1plus 6y agoHow about the government doesn't steal people's stuff!? Unless the item contained improperly secured radioactive material or something like that, I see zero reason why the state should have the right to seize someone's property for attempting to ship it into the country from another locale. If society is concerned about vendors here in the USA selling dodgy stuff, there are far superior solutions like regulating retailers and hold them accountable that do not require invasive boarder searches. Customs inspection are 99% a complete scam designed to enable the government to steal money and property from people.