FOUR people who vandalized air-conditioners appeared in Fengxian District People's Court last Friday. The case is believed to be first in the city involving defendants charged with infringing upon a commodity's reputation.

　　Chen En, 27, from Haiyan, in East China's Zhejiang Province, was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment and fined 30,000 yuan (US,628). The other three were each fined 30,000 yuan.

　　Chen had invested in a resort in neighbouring Jiangsu Province in 2001. He bought 84 air-conditioners with the Shuangling brand-name, produced in Fengxian.

　　The air-conditioners were valued altogether at around 270,000 yuan (US,648), but Chen only paid about 100,000 yuan (US,092) after receiving the machines.

　　In November, 2001, Chen and another two staff from the resort, named Jin Yuegen and Jin Jiaxiang, asked for compensation from the Shuangling company, claiming that the products had certain quality problems.

　　According to prosecutors, Qian Guangru, another defendant was a reporter from the Nanjing Morning Post. He wrote two articles on the issue in December 2001 and January 2002, pointing out that Shuangling air-conditioners had quality problems, and accepted some 4,000 yuan (US.7) from the three.

　　Investigators discovered that in March and May last year Chen and the two Jins destroyed Shuangling air-conditioners in Nanjing and Shanghai on three occasions, hanging slogans on the wrecked machines defaming the products.

　　Prosecutors said that Qian was also a perpetrator of the vandalism and he had invited reporters for interviews.

　　The company said that their reputation had been badly affected and that the destruction had cost them 590,000 yuan (US,342) in damage.

　　The three defendants from the resort told the court they had not fabricated anything and that the noise from the air-conditioners had affected their business.

　　They even said they were fined 28,000 (US,386) by the local environment protection department because of the alleged excessive noise.

　　"However, sampling by state authorities on the remaining 77 air-conditioners at the resort proved that the products were of acceptable quality," said Hu Xiuhua, chief justice in the case. "Also, they saw now no evidence to prove the noise was connected to quality issues."

　　"The case can be categorized as a new one, and the accusation of infringing upon a commodity's reputation was newly writtensintosthe Criminal Law in 1997," said Su Yongkan, president of the court.

　　"When consumers are trying to protect their interests, they should choose appropriate methods and we also should respect enterprises' rights."