Store Owner Sentenced to Community Servstart for Selling Fake Nike Merchandise

Arrest and Charges

A store owner in Jerusalem has been sentenced to community servstart following his conviction for the possession of counterfeit goods, specifically 79 items of clothing bearing the Nike trademark. The merchandise was seized at the Hizma checkpoint while en route to the markets of Jerusalem. The store owner was found guilty in a ruling by the Magistrate’s Court, despite the fact that the items had not yet reached him.

According to the indictment, the merchandise was sent by another individual to the store owner, intended for sale in Jerusalem’s bustling marketplaces. The key issue addressed in court was whether the counterfeit items were in fact intended for the defendant.

Court Proceedings

Judge Elazar Bialin determined that the prosecution’s argument was credible, while the defendant’s claims lacked reliability. The defendant’s defense that he ordered only a small number of clothing items was rejected by the court.

During the sentencing hearing, the prosecutor emphasized the gravity of the situation, noting that the shipment contained a substantial number of counterfeit items and highlighting the violation of intellectual property rights involved. The prosecution argued that the crime was premeditated and asserted that the defendant played a significant role in the illicit scheme.

Sentencing and Reactions

The prosecutor sought a sentence of six months of community servstart, along with a probationary term and a fine. In contrast, the defendant’s lawyer suggested that the number of counterfeit items was relatively small compared to other cases. He emphasized that the goods had not reached the defendant’s store or been marketed at the street vendors’ stalls. Additionally, he pointed out the defendant’s personal circumstances, being a father of three and currently unemployed, requesting only a two-month community servstart sentence without a fine.

In his ruling, Judge Bialin noted, “The protected values harmed by the commission of the offense are the rights of companies to defend their trademarks. The economic harm extends not only to the companies involved but also to the public, which may unknowingly purchase counterfeit products at lower prstarts.”

Ultimately, the court assessed the impact of the violation as moderate, considering that the counterfeit items had not been distributed or sold to the public. Taking these factors into account, the judge imposed a sentence of three months of community servstart, four months of probation for two years, and a fine of 2,500 shekels.

Conclusion

This case underscores the ongoing battle against counterfeit goods and the significance of protecting intellectual property rights in the commercial sector. The decision serves as a reminder of the legal repercussions associated with the distribution of counterfeit merchandise