HNB Home · Heated Tobacco and Vaping Industry NewsChinese
Home›Vaping News›Economic Observer: Behind E-Cigarette Lawsuits, Product Strength and Healthy Competition Are Becomin
Vaping News · national
Economic Observer: Behind E-Cigarette Lawsuits, Product Strength and Healthy Competition Are Becomin
H cink2023-07-22Views 565Source 未知
Key takeaway: Overall, under the new national standards, the e-cigarette market is gradually developing fairer and more effective healthy competition. Returning to the product itself, innovation and value for money will determine the new competitive lands
Overall, under the new national standards, the e-cigarette market is gradually forming a fairer and more effective healthy competition. Returning to the product itself, the innovation, cost-effectiveness, and other factors will determine who can stay at the new "table" and will also determine the speed and depth of the e-cigarette market's rise.
Nearly nine months have passed since the new national standards were implemented, and the e-cigarette industry has been stirred again. Recently, there has been new progress in lawsuits involving companies and self-media that were once considered to have directional significance in the new national standard era.Recent public information shows that the lawsuit filed by e-cigarette companyBode against Beijing Xinkoo Technology Co., Ltd. for online infringement liability has completed its first-instance judgment, with Bode winning the case. The latter is required to apologize to Bode and compensate for certain losses.The core of this lawsuit arises from the dispute over the compatibility of pods, and at a deeper level, it reflects the market interest contradictions formed by the implementation of the new national standards and existing market elements, involving capital, monopoly, and fair competition intertwined with patents, infringement, and market interest redistribution, which entangles regulatory agencies, supply chains, brand owners, retail channels, and consumers.The first-instance judgment directly reflects the current policy allowances for pod compatibility in the e-cigarette industry and market recognition, and can be seen as a manifestation of the irreversible trend of compatibility, the core competition of products, and the direction of healthy market competition.However, as a self-media under Beijing Xinkoo Technology Co., Ltd., which is also a core related party in this lawsuit, it is dissatisfied with the first-instance judgment and has recently filed an appeal. The final judgment result, along with the related compatibility trends and the deep changes in the e-cigarette industry's competitive "deep water zone," still needs to be observed.The first significant lawsuit between a company and mediaThis lawsuit between Bode and a certain e-cigarette industry self-media is not complicated.To summarize the timeline, on September 9, 2022, Bode issued a statement pointing out that a certain self-media under Beijing Xinkoo Technology published two articles on its WeChat public account on September 5 and 6 of that year, distorting existing regulatory policies without any objective factual basis or evidence, misleading the public, and maliciously defaming Bode's "Shengshi Xiaohongdan" product as infringing on the rights of a competing manufacturer, maliciously defaming Bode for passing the national standard technical review under "violations."
The deeper dispute between the two parties centers on whether pod compatibility constitutes infringement and whether compatible pods passing national standard reviews and entering the market are illegal and harmful to the industry, leading to the fermentation of the so-called "compatibility infringement theory" and "compatibility guilt theory" to a peak in public opinion."Compatible pods" refer to pods from one brand that can be used with multiple e-cigarette brands, which benefits consumers by allowing them to update flavors in a timely manner, providing a diverse flavor experience. However, the original brand considers this to infringe on its commercial interests, labeling it as infringement. Coincidentally, the self-media mentioned that the bottom design of Bode's pods is very similar to that of a certain brand's pods.However, the National Intellectual Property Administration declared all patent rights for pod interfaces invalid as early as last April. Moreover, compatibility is not classified as infringement at the legal level, as the appearance structure of pods is simple, lacking originality, and does not have breakthrough innovation, with its role in attracting or guiding consumption being exaggerated, thus its appearance patent is not established.At that time, there was less than a month before the new national standards were to be officially implemented. For related companies, especially leading enterprises, the new policy regulation brought both predictable and unknown factors, with the new market environment and competitive context forming a focus of interest, evolving into direct responses.On September 14, 2022, Bode filed a lawsuit against Beijing Xinkoo Technology in the Beijing Internet Court, demanding that the defendant publicly apologize, eliminate the impact, and provide economic compensation.Three months later, Bode announced that its lawsuit against Beijing Xinkoo Technology for online infringement liability was heard on January 18, 2023.In summary, the confrontation between Bode and a certain self-media reveals that the e-cigarette industry has entered a heated phase regarding compatibility disputes, and it is also a new landscape formed by the intertwining of new policies, new market competition, and related capital and media.The first-instance judgment made by the court has set a significant tone for this landscape, requiring the defendant, Beijing Xinkoo Technology, to apologize to the plaintiff, Bode, and to provide a certain amount of economic compensation. This can also be understood as the legal support for the notion that pod compatibility does not constitute infringement, and the legal principles have gradually become clearer.A noteworthy detail is that before the first-instance judgment was issued, the aforementioned self-media deleted relevant content from its public account and official website. Currently, the latest search shows that the self-media's public account indicates "no more subscription messages," meaning all articles have been deleted.However, authoritative sources reveal that the self-media is dissatisfied with the first-instance judgment and has filed an appeal.The first lawsuit between an e-cigarette company and media has not reached its conclusion yet.Irreversible trends and new competitive tablesFrom a market perspective, pod compatibility aligns with the industry's development direction and trends.Public information shows that Bode has been steadily increasing the number of brand products that have successfully passed the new national standard review, most of which are compatible interfaces, receiving positive market feedback. Unofficial statistics indicate that besides Bode, several brands such as Lankai, MR Mirui, VOOPOO, and Koyi have also had national standard products approved and launched recently, receiving good reviews at the retail end.This at least indicates that pod compatibility has gained recognition in terms of policy regulation, product control, and market response.Analyzing the entire e-cigarette industry chain, upstream supply chains, brand owners, retail channels, and consumers are all interconnected key elements, and compatibility generally brings more benefits than drawbacks.Compatible pods can be simply understood as the "compatibility" seen in other industries, such as the charging interfaces of mobile phones. On the basis of compatibility, upstream supply chains can be more efficient, avoiding the production of numerous incompatible products and reducing resource waste. At the same time, standardized production facilitates market regulation, lowers corresponding costs, and further standardizes production.Because of compatibility, more brand owners have more opportunities to sit at the "table" of new competition fairly during the new national standard period, compared to monopoly or oligopoly, ensuring that market competition releases more fullness and fairness. This is intuitively reflected in product diversification and some price reductions, benefiting stores and consumers.Stores can flexibly formulate product combinations and stocking plans, as national policies stipulate that e-cigarette stores cannot operate exclusively, meaning there are no specialty stores, and a single store can offer multiple e-cigarette brands. At the same time, the existence of compatibility allows a single device to be compatible with multiple brands' pods, which is more beneficial for their operations.Consumers now have more autonomy in their choices, reducing expenses on certain products and lowering the costs of switching between different brands.Thus, the elements of the industry chain form a virtuous cycle of supply and demand. Overall, under the new national standards, the policy allowance and market adaptability of compatibility have, to some extent, avoided or weakened the influence or effectiveness of capital accumulation and market monopoly during the non-national standard period, gradually forming a fairer and more effective healthy market competition.The capital-intensive approach will give way to a "product is king" strategy, returning to the product itself, where innovation, cost-effectiveness, and other factors will determine who can stay at the new "table" and will also determine the speed and depth of the e-cigarette market's rise.This article is reproduced from "Economic Observer" with the original title "Behind the E-Cigarette Company and Media Lawsuit: Product is King, Healthy Competition Becomes Mainstream."
