Anti-Counterfeiting FAQs

Counterfeiting commonly involves unauthorised goods or packaging using a trade mark, sign or branding that falsely presents the goods as genuine or connected with the rights owner. The precise legal position depends on the IP rights, the sign used and the circumstances of manufacture, importation, sale or advertising.

No. A competing product may look similar without being a counterfeit in the strict sense. It may still raise trade mark, design, copyright or passing-off issues, but the rights and legal tests need to be identified before allegations are made.

Registered trade marks are often central to anti-counterfeiting because they provide a defined registered right that can support platform complaints, customs measures and enforcement. Other rights, including registered designs and copyright, can also be relevant depending on what has been copied.

No. Genuine goods and counterfeit goods are fundamentally different, although genuine goods imported or marketed outside authorised channels can raise separate trade mark and exhaustion issues. The supply chain and origin of the goods should be checked carefully.

Preserve the listing and seller evidence first. Depending on the platform and rights available, a rights-owner complaint or takedown request may remove the listing. For repeat or commercially serious sellers, further investigation and enforcement may be appropriate rather than treating each listing in isolation.

A controlled test purchase can provide useful evidence about the product, packaging, seller, payment route and fulfilment chain. It should be planned so that evidence is preserved properly and the investigation is not unnecessarily compromised.

Capture the account, posts, advertisements, links and seller details before reporting them. Platform procedures can sometimes remove infringing content or accounts, while connected websites, payment channels and marketplace listings may reveal a wider network.

Repeated takedowns alone may not solve a persistent problem. Look for common identifiers such as contact details, payment information, product images, fulfilment addresses and linked domains, then consider a broader enforcement strategy.

Border enforcement can be an important part of a brand-protection programme. Rights owners may be able to provide customs authorities with information about relevant IP rights and genuine products so suspicious shipments can be identified and dealt with under the applicable procedure.

It is a mechanism through which an IP rights owner asks customs authorities to assist with identifying suspected infringing goods at the border. The exact procedure, territories covered and information required depend on the relevant customs system.

The rights owner may be notified and asked to assess whether the goods appear infringing within a specified timeframe. Depending on the procedure and response of the parties, goods may be destroyed or further legal steps may be required.

Useful information can include trade mark registrations, genuine product images, packaging details, known counterfeit indicators, authorised routes, importers, manufacturers and likely shipment patterns. Practical product intelligence can make border measures much more effective.

Preserve evidence before alerting the seller. Record listings, webpages, seller identities, product photographs, dates and any available transaction details. Then confirm the relevant IP rights and decide whether the priority is removal, intelligence gathering, disruption, recovery or wider enforcement.

Not always. A letter may resolve some cases quickly, but contacting a seller too early can cause evidence or stock to disappear. The seriousness of the activity, evidence already secured and broader enforcement objective should be considered first.

No. Many matters are resolved through takedowns, undertakings, negotiated settlements, customs action or other targeted measures. Litigation may be appropriate for serious or persistent infringement, but proportionality and commercial value matter.

Some forms of trade mark counterfeiting can involve criminal offences as well as civil infringement. Depending on the facts, enforcement bodies may have a role, but rights owners should still preserve evidence and coordinate their strategy carefully.

Yes. Monitoring can cover marketplaces, websites, domains, social platforms and other relevant channels. The objective is to identify meaningful threats early and prioritise action rather than generating an unmanageable list of every online mention.

Prioritise according to commercial harm, sales volume, consumer risk, visibility, repeat behaviour, territory and the strength of available evidence. A coordinated programme is usually more effective than treating every seller as equally important.

International cases may require a combination of local IP rights, platform procedures, customs measures, local advisers and investigation. The best approach depends on where the seller, goods, customers and relevant assets are located.