Apple originally claimed that the Samsung Galaxy phones were a direct counterfiet of their work. They sued, and Samsung made changes.
OnePlus buds are a new product (I think released in 2020). It's probably just an honest mistake by the CBP, but it could also be they have some official direction to seize these OnePlus products either because Apple considers them to be infringing, or the Feds are acting as part of the broader trade-war.
Looks like rather generic design to me, especially since a substantial parts of are basically dictated by the human anatomy. So regardless the questionable nature of design patents in the first place, this design certainly does not warrant such patents. But in any case, that's for a court to decide. Does the USA actively seize other products that violate patents without a court case? How would they even determine infringement? I don't remember Apple winning any court case against OnePlus, so that can't be the reason for this seizure.
If these buds were seized as counterfeits, then there had to be an express intent to sell these as imitation Apple products, which I find rather hard to believe (for starters because the packaging isn't the same). Also, when producers remove any brand markings, like logos and other distinctive material unique to that company, knock-off/imitation cases are always weak. For good reasons too, just as with trademarking generic names. You don't want a single company to dictate the use of generic things.
Maybe most import is that this seizure will unlikely have happened on a whim. Almost certainly, somebody has requested for this to happen. That itself should give rise to some serious questions. Because it would likely make this a rather blatant (and probably unlawful) case of economical warfare.
To use the extraordinary powers of border guards for that purpose, without any court case, is downright corrupt. Like mafia style corruption. I wonder which highest ranking official signed off on this. That person has some explaining to do, for he/she just made the USA look like a tinpot dictatorship. Ignorant too, to boast about it on their web site. Unless that's done intentional, as propaganda to convince the locals this was legal or good "to protect America". People abroad will likely have a very different view on that.
What the American government often forgets, in its self-centred and mostly domestic focus, is that the rest of the world is observing things like these. Behaviour like this always has consequences, even if it can take a while.
Just make a 3-way comparison between apple airpods [1], oneplus buds [2] and the previous oneplus bullets [3]. Ignore the cable.
OnePlus change their design to be shaped like a quarter note, remove the controls, change to white shiny plastic, add a downward pointing cylinder with a silver ring at the end, change to hard plastic instead of a soft rubber earpiece, change to a 0 shaped sound outlet, add a charging case, and make the charging case white and unbranded with rounded corners a flip top and a single green LED at the centre?
This is fairly blatantly an off-brand clone. However, I don't think off-brand clones are illegal if sold as such, so I'm not sure this shipment should have been seized - but I can understand the custom agents' confusion.
Last time I checked, quarter notes, lack of controls, hard shiny plastic, silver rings on a cylinder's end, nor the color white are properties/concepts that Apple has (nor ever should) exclusive control/ownership of. Same goes for the charging case, which arguably is a good illustration of design follows function. It's Apple's choice to make it void of distinctive branding, but they like to have their cake and eat it too.
Your definition of an off-brand clone is going way beyond my understanding of that concept. To be a clone, the intention to sell it as such is a rather integral part of the concept.
Just as with car brands, each years many of the new luxurious models share common design features. It's called (contemporary) fashion, which is about as old as brands producing luxurious items. As are companies trailing behind in such trends.
Apple's many attempts to aggressively "defend" their (rather generic, but consequential of their minimalist) product designs could be seen either as a pathetic/cynical joke in the face of history, or more likely as a form of deliberate stretching of conventional wisdom regarding design (to a point of corruption), only for the sake of profits and damned to consequences or precedents it might set (or already has).
US Customs has been checking international shipments for counterfeit goods and other contraband since a long time. It's part of what a Customs agency customarily does.
How else would you prevent counterfeit goods from entering a country? For domestic mad counterfeits, it's possible to enforce laws (or court orders) prohibiting manufacture, but that's not really the case when the products are made overseas.
You said that correctly: counterfeit products. While Apple fanboys no doubt will claim that these OnePlus products are counterfeits of Apple products, that's mostly just their ignorance or wishful thinking talking.
From what I can see, there is no actual counterfeiting involved here. This product is both generic enough in design and not brandishing any Apple specific markings. Also comes with a box that makes it clear it's not an Apple product.
Sure, Apple might not like that people can walk around with something that looks similar to their overprices exclusive stuff, for a lot less. But that's not a valid definition of counterfeit. You see, it's missing the "fraudulent" part in the "fraudulent imitation" definition of counterfeit.
Maybe Apple should not have made their things look that generic. They might have a case if a logo or other protected asset was imitated. But this is not a clear-cut case. Rather one that should at least have a court rule on first.
The elephant in the room here is the USA showing what it can do (pretty much with impunity, short term at least) to a Chinese company. Long term, that will prove incredibly dumb and costly for the USA. But not a single person in government, nor any American company executive, will look that far ahead or even remotely care. By that time they are already long gone, pockets filled with short term gains and someone else to deal with the negative consequences.
Sorry, I didn't mention it earlier, since you seemed upset by Customs in general. This certainly appears to be a false positive, and it will most likely get resolved in favor of the importer, unless there's some trademark action we're all unaware of. The shipment is still gonna be delayed though, and that delay is not likely to be compensated; it's a risk in the system (along with many other risks of loss or delay in international shipping)
It would probably be better for CBP not to publish their seizures like this until they had gone through the process.
I'm not particularly upset by Customs in general, but I get upset when they stretch or abuse their already far reaching authority and privileges. Mainly because I strongly believe that all extreme powers come with extreme responsibility and require extreme accountability in order to not end up being used for all the wrong reasons.
This action, including its publication, smells like brutally political, shortsighted, and very likely unlawful (though Customs lives mostly by definition outside the usual legal territory, so there goes accountability).
Part of me stopped caring about it a long time ago, when it became clear that the USA is hellbent on accelerating its inevitable demise (as a defacto empire), as long as it can make powerful companies and politicians a few quick bucks along the ride.
On the other hand, it still hurts to see stupid things like these happen, while most people appear clueless about the consequences. I know it will be ordinary American citizens that ultimately will pay a price for this, with time.
That still pisses me off .. and hopefully it will always remain doing so.
Big corporations like Amazon are part of the dominating class. Me (and probably you, since you need to ask the question -- no offense intended) are part of the dominated class. Two different sets of rules apply here, it's not a matter of the products themselves being different.
Or more traditionally known as owning class and working class. Most folks here are probably in that quasi-state of working class but make plenty of money so it's a moot point.
I always prefered the 4-class system, which specified a class of people who cared more about the perfection of their art, than monetary concerns. Tradesmen, engineers, and academics would fall into this category.
Just lumping everyone into the middle-class based on income alone, always seemed to be an American conceit.
Class is supposed to be able pedigree; thus a king in exile is still part of the aristocratic elite because he was raised as such even if he doesn't have a dollar to his name.
You are looking for meaning. That is a normal human instinct.
I am talking about power structures. They should be examined. Most people here are not willing to do that, because they figure they will soon be the top dogs. They are wrong, and this expectation is being exploiting by less naive actors.
I agree though I think the 4 class system enables people to fight for their place within the social strata. Today, many are against unions out of an odd idea, that the economy is all that matters, and that with an unconstrained market they too will get their lottery ticket to being the next Jeff Bezos.
If one thinks the highest calling is to be a proficient tradesman then we absolutely want a union to push back against business interest stopping us from gaining more mastery. That's a direct attack against the existing power structure.
