Online marketplaces, counterfeits and consumer disappointment

A recent report by EUIPO on the risks and damages posed by IP infringement in Europe has identified that nearly one in 10 European consumers believe they have been tricked into buying counterfeit goods online.

E-commerce is booming with more than 70% of Europeans shopping online in 2020. That figure is expected to continue to grow, as a result of COVID-19 restrictions and evolution in habits and preferences.

However, as highlighted in EUIPO’s June report Risks and damages posed by IPR infringement in Europe, consumers are increasingly being tricked into purchasing fake products. According to its findings, nearly one in 10 Europeans (9%) have been misled into buying counterfeits, and a third of Europeans (33%) are unsure as to whether a product they have purchased is original.

As a result, uncertainty regarding counterfeit products has become a growing concern for consumers with many reporting themselves unable to distinguish between genuine and fake goods. This is particularly the case on online marketplaces, where counterfeit goods are made to appear ‘real’ through unauthorised use of the brand owner’s own marketing product photographs and/or descriptions.

Whose responsibility is it to stamp out the counterfeit trade?

Last month, the International Trademark Association (INTA) also released its own report, Addressing the sale of counterfeits on the internet, in which it discusses how online marketplaces are in the best position to stop counterfeiters because of the direct relationships they have with their sellers. It also called on them to address practices and algorithms that may also be exacerbating the problem. For example, many online marketplaces provide verification seals and high search placements for high-volume customers, which can often make a seller appear more trustworthy than it perhaps is.

Among its key recommendations for change, INTA puts forward that online marketplaces should take more responsibility for verifying the identities and addresses of their sellers, and improve their disclosure policies to facilitate access by brand owners and law enforcement authorities to seller identities. At the moment: “Counterfeiters have the ability to remain anonymous when posting items for sale, as virtually every aspect of the sales process can be performed using false or incomplete names.

This is important because counterfeit networks often operate multiple and seemingly unrelated stores across online marketplaces as a means to disguise the size of their operation. In other words, if one store is removed, there is very little real financial impact for the counterfeiters.

The need for a two-pronged approach

But, while both INTA and the EUIPO reports argue the important role to be played by online marketplaces in the fight against counterfeiting, they are also clear that brand owners, brand organisations and intermediaries also have an important role to play. This includes the need for consumer education, as well as proactive monitoring and enforcement across platforms both established and up-and-coming.

As we have previously written, changes are expected to online marketplace takedown practices in the EU as a result of the forthcoming Digital Services Act, adding new opportunities and risks to online brand protection strategies. For this reason, brand owners are advised to favour online brand protection solutions that offer dedicated, marketplace-specific takedown workflows that are both automated and tailored to the legal issue encountered.

Such solutions also enable brand owners and their advisers to work more effectively with online marketplaces, thereby upholding their IP rights and protecting their customers.

To find out more about Novagraaf’s dedicated Online Brand Protection for Marketplaces service, download our flyer or contact our team.

Insights liés

Articles

Les conditions juridiques de la mise en place d’une publicité comparative

La publicité comparative permet de comparer des produits ou services en utilisant les marques ou noms de concurrents, visant à objectivement montrer les avantages des produits pour stimuler la concurrence. Elle est licite sous certaines conditions strictes et doit éviter d’être trompeuse, dénigrante ou de créer de la confusion. Colombe Dougnac fait le point.

Par Colombe Dougnac,
Les conditions juridiques de la mise en place d’une publicité comparative
Blog Nova IP Hour

[Blog] L’OEB réduit la liste des Etats pouvant bénéficier d’une réduction de taxes pour la recherche internationale et l'examen préliminaire international

Le 3 juillet 2024, l'OEB a publié un communiqué révisant les critères donnant droit à des réductions de 75% des taxes de recherche internationale et d'examen préliminaire international en faveur à certains Etats. Cette mesure vise à promouvoir l'accessibilité au système international de brevets pour les inventeurs et les entreprises des pays en développement. Lire la suite

Par Novagraaf Team,
[Blog] L’OEB réduit la liste des Etats pouvant bénéficier d’une réduction de taxes pour la recherche internationale et l'examen préliminaire international

Pour plus d'informations ou de conseils contactez-nous