A representative told her that Rubik's Cube patent had expired, and the Magic Cube did not infringe on the rival toy's trademark.
This not being in quotes, I can attribute it to bad reporting with a paraphrase. Which is it, patent or trademark? The trademark hasn't expired, so it must be the patent.
"One of the things that our agency's responsible for doing is protecting the integrity of the economy and our nation's financial systems and obviously trademark infringement does have significant economic implications"
But this is a quote. How does "Magic Cube" infringe on the trademark "Rubik's Cube"? That's different enough to warrant a court case over it, especially since the Rubik's Cube trademark specifically makes no claim on the word "Cube" except for as it appears in their artwork. A Customs IP enforcement official didn't know, and I looked it up (and the expired patent) in under a minute? And a store got raided over this? This is sad.
This not being in quotes, I can attribute it to bad reporting with a paraphrase. Which is it, patent or trademark? The trademark hasn't expired, so it must be the patent.
There is nothing whatsoever wrong with the reporting. This sentence is perfectly clear -- the representative stated that the patent had expired and the trademark was not infringed.
And trademark infringement is enforced by homeland security? Also, AFAIK, enforcement by customs occurs after a court order issues.