Huawei Wins Case Against Peruvian Firm Over Trademark Infringement

Huawei Wins Legal Victory Against Peruvian Accessory Seller

Huawei has secured a favorable ruling in an administrative proceeding before Peru’s consumer protection agency, Indecopi, against a Peruvian company selling mobile phone accessories. The authority concluded that the marketing of phone cases and chargers identified with signs identical or similar to the Huawei brand infringed upon the Chinese technology company’s industrial property rights.

According to Resolution No. 0625-2025/CESD-INDECOPI, Indecopi determined that the use of the sign on products like back covers and chargers created a risk of confusion in the market, as they were identical goods or directly linked to those distinguished by Huawei’s registered trademarks in Peru. The Commission of Distinctive Signs imposed a financial sanction and ordered corrective measures against the accused company.

The case began on March 15, 2023, when Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. Filed a complaint against Smartphones Peru S.A.C. Alleging infringement of its trademark rights. Huawei claimed that the Peruvian company was marketing cases and chargers for cell phones using signs and graphic variations associated with its brand, without authorization.

The complaint was based on articles 155(c) and (d) of Decision 486 of the Andean Community, which protects trademark owners against the unauthorized use of identical or similar signs that could induce confusion or create a risk of association with consumers.

Following the admission of the complaint, Indecopi ordered an inspection of the accused company’s commercial premises, located in the La Molina district. During the inspection, conducted on August 23, 2023, it was found that Smartphones Peru S.A.C. Sold mobile phones, accessories and repair services.

During the inspection, precautionary measures were taken to cease use and confiscate the infringing products. Photographic records were also taken and incorporated into the administrative file.

In its defense, the Peruvian company argued that the confiscated cases did not bear the official Huawei logo, but only references to the model of the device they were intended for. The company also stated that the products were generic and had been acquired from local suppliers and international e-commerce platforms, such as AliExpress.

The company stated: “[…] the sale of cases are generic brands but the word Huawei is mentioned because It’s according to the model of cell phone that is marketed, but they are not products marketed by the Huawei brand […]“.

The Commission analyzed the documentation presented by both parties, including proof of payment, notarial deeds, photographs, sales reports, and inspection records. Based on this review, Indecopi concluded that the products marketed did use the Huawei sign to identify cases and chargers, regardless of whether they reproduced the official logo in all cases.

It was also determined that some documents presented by the Peruvian company, such as AliExpress order lists, were not relevant to the analysis, as they corresponded to dates after the complaint was filed.

A central point of the resolution was the analysis of the risk of confusion. Indecopi verified that Huawei is the owner of several trademarks registered in Class 09 of the International Classification, which includes, among other products, cases and chargers for mobile phones.

The Commission concluded that the signs used by the accused company were phonetically identical to the Huawei trademark and that the graphic or chromatic differences were not sufficient to prevent consumers from assuming that they were products linked to the trademark owner. In this sense, it was established that the use of the sign infringed article 155(d) of Decision 486.

As a result of the proceeding, Indecopi declared the complaint well-founded with respect to the risk of confusion and ordered a fine against Smartphones Peru S.A.C. The sanction was calculated using the ad-hoc method provided for in Supreme Decree No. 032-2021-PCM, based on the income obtained from the sale of the infringing products.

According to the company’s own information, sales of cases and chargers identified with the Huawei sign amounted to S/ 1.712 during the period evaluated. In addition to the fine, the resolution ordered the definitive cessation of the use of the sign and the confiscation of the infringing products, as well as the payment of costs and expenses of the procedure in favor of the multinational technology company.

Huawei is a Chinese technology giant widely known for its mobile phones and telecommunications equipment, founded in 1987 in Shenzhen and with a presence in more than 170 countries. After facing sanctions from the United States since 2019 that limited its access to technology and services like Google, the company has promoted its own HarmonyOS operating system and developed its own processors, which has allowed it to remain relevant, especially in its domestic market, where it has regained leadership in smartphone sales and continues to compete with traditional global brands.

In recent years, Huawei has sought to return to the international scene with innovative devices such as foldable models and the Pura 80 series, incorporating its own camera and 5G technologies despite the restrictions. Its smartphone business even grew in revenue in 2024, although with lower net profits due to heavy investments in R&D and new segments such as wearables and connected cars. Analysts point out that, despite technological advances, the lack of Google services and the challenge of attracting users outside of China remain obstacles to sustained global expansion.

The European Commission took a new step this Tuesday in its plan to remove foreign suppliers considered high risk, including Chinese firms Huawei and ZTE, from the telecommunications networks and other strategic infrastructure of member states. The initiative aims to make the security recommendations issued by Brussels for 5G networks binding rather than advisory.

Executive Vice President Henna Virkkunen stated that “cybersecurity threats are strategic risks to our democracy, economy and way of life,” defending the proposal to amend the EU Cybersecurity Act. According to her, these risks go beyond purely technical issues and require a structural response.

Virkkunen affirmed that the set of measures seeks to strengthen Europe’s technological sovereignty and ensure “greater security for all.” To this end, the EU will make available all the necessary tools to “better protect the supply chains of critical infrastructure and decisively combat cyberattacks.”

The reform of the Cybersecurity Act, which still needs to be discussed with national governments and the European Parliament, contemplates the obligation to eliminate from European mobile networks the risks associated with suppliers from third countries classified as dangerous. Currently, Brussels only sets the evaluation criteria, but once the rule is approved—which will include a ‘blacklist’—countries will have up to three years to terminate existing contracts.

The Vice President clarified that the legislation still “does not define any country or company,” as that identification will be carried out after specific risk assessments. In the field of 5G networks, she confirmed that the EU will draw up a “catalog of problematic service providers” and monitor compliance with deadlines for ceasing to contract with these companies by member states.