Seized counterfeit Clothes, food and household goods donated to charity.

I wonder what others make of this and the direction it seems we are heading in.

www.bbc.co.uk...

The clothing was seized by East Sussex County Council's trading standards and given to the Salvation Army and Oasis Christian Outreach in Eastbourne.

It was all de-branded before being re-branded with the His Church Charity label so that it could be legally distributed within the UK.

Rebranding counterfeit Clothes, food and household goods can't be good can it? Kinda smacks of desperation to me.. and is the first time I have heard of anything like this happeing (in the UK)

Do other areas, countries do this? is this the new norm? no longer will we destroy counterfeit good but rebrand them and sell them on through other outlets.

*Note. I placed this here in the meltdown forum as I feel this new approach indiciative of the changes being forced on society by the meltdown.

reply to post by thoughtsfull


I don't think this is a bad idea, in theory, though the potential for abuse is profound if there isn't massive oversight and control.

In the US the seizure of goods is big business - everything from counterfeits to the cars and homes of those convicted of drug charges - but the problem is that, as far as I can tell, the proceeds from these seizures simply fall into the black hole of government spending.

If this company doing the rebranding is actually a valid and honorable charitable organization and the poor and needy will actually benefit from this... then good. Take the tools of the devil and use them for the betterment of society.

Otherwise it smacks of a scam to make fat cat politicians even fatter...

~Heff

reply to post by thoughtsfull


I don't understand. What could be wrong with this. The de-branding is taking the name brand (put there illegally by the counterfeiters) off of the item and putting the charity brand on the item. I don't see anything whatsoever wrong with this... killing two birds with one stone, stopping the sale of these counterfeit items and helping charity out.

i just think its kind of strange for somebody to be wearing the same shirt that put another person in jail.


they should have just de-branded it from whoever had it first, and let them keep the clothes.


i also think it should be the original companies responsibility to enforce this kind of stuff....not the gov.

counterfeiting in my mind is about the same level crime as spitting on the sidewalk.

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


Well the goods may be debranded but will still have the hallmarks of who they where made to imitate, the style, cut of cloth, and pattens (e.g you can't really debrand Burberry products).. which would still mean the clothing manufacturer has legitimate counterfiets of their products on the market.

Anyway clothing is one thing, but given the squeeky H&S bottoms in the UK I have to wonder how counterfeit food and household goods can suddenly be fit for use..

* Caveat
I have run a number of UK charity shops in my spare time (at one time for BHF and another for Scope) and the anal rules we have to follow on what we can and can not sell is rather extreme.. So from the perspective of a charity outlet manager I find this approach rather strange and almost undermines all existing rules.

I see no problem with this practice. The shirts afterall are still wearable and destroying them would be an extreme waste.

What scared me was that there was also counterfeit food! I didn't know that there was such a thing. That sounds dangerous. You never know what could be in that. Hopefully that doesn't get re-sold to the poor, because it could be dangerous to their health!!

If you or I wouldn't eat it, why give it to someone else??

reply to post by Hefficide


The Branding is "His Church Charity" which is backed by the Salvation Army.. I tihnk the Sally Ann pretty reputable.. however it seems a strange turn of events given the strict rules applied to counterfeit goods in the UK, and the strict rules Charity outlets have to abide by.

reply to post by wayno


It's not the practice that I find interesting it is that this is a new approach from the establishment.. an establishment that is supported by the manfacturers that this will undermine. So feel this approach a contradiction in the aim of getting all counterfeit products off the streets.

I'll prob pop over to Eastbourne next weekend and have a butchers to see what it is they are selling.. as you say, the counterfeit food aspect would be nice to resolve.

reply to post by thoughtsfull


Better than just allow them to collect dust or spending the money to destroy them. I think it's a rather good idea.

reply to post by thoughtsfull


I would hope that it was a case of humanitarian logic doing its magic. It is ridiculous to think that all that expense of effort and materials would be wasted when there are people in need.

The real crime, to me, is how someone can charge $50 for a shirt just because it has a brand name silk screened on it. It is a damning testimony to the silly and shallow culture the west has developed.

Rebranding it and providing relief to the needy is as good a use as anything. Let the company that is being counterfeited write it off as a charitable donation, by providing something roughly akin to their branding for charity.