Category: Online Brand Protection

When Do Dupes Dupe? The Challenges of Taking Down Copycat Products from Online Platforms

     |     

In In recent years, a major problem confronting brand owners has been the rise of “dupe” products on online platforms. Driven by millennial and Gen Z influencers and consumers, the term ostensibly gained currency as shorthand for “duplicate”. Yet, as one academic notes, the connotations of the word have grown to become versatile, encompassing not only directly counterfeit or infringing products, but also lookalike products that test the boundaries of trademark law. Considering this, how do brands protect intellectual property rights with the rise of dupe culture? Furthermore, while various articles in the mainstream media have tended to focus on the dupe phenomenon in the context of the luxury goods and premium apparel sector, data with Authentix shows that the word “dupe” has become a normalized, catch-all term spanning a wide range of sectors. In 2024, Authentix recorded an increase in the usage of the term by approximately 20 percent in a twelve-month period (our measurement covering 10 major social media platforms and marketplaces and 100 leading brands across multiple sectors).

Invariably, the unique selling proposition behind dupe products is the fact that they cost less than the original product they seek to imitate. As an example of a typical dupe listing, below are screenshots of two images we encountered online. The first advertises dupes of Nike sneakers and the second Stanley drinkware — both products costing significantly less than the original.

     

In the examples above, if both brand owners own registrations for figurative trademarks/trade dress or designs copied in the dupe product, both cases would be clear-cut cases of trademark infringement. But this is often not the case. Accordingly, in instances like those above, it could be argued that word mark infringement has taken place. Although the word NIKE and the swoosh logo do not appear to be affixed to the dupe sneakers, and the word STANLEY similarly does not seem to be affixed to the tumbler, both listings arguably breach the permissible limits of comparative advertising. For instance, in the European Union, Directive 2006/114/EC disallows comparative advertising where a trader attempts to “present goods or services as imitations or replicas of goods or services bearing a protected trade mark or trade name.” Further, applying the principle of initial interest confusion (recognized by courts around the world, and defined as a situation “where a plaintiff can demonstrate that a consumer was confused by a defendant’s conduct at the time of interest in a product or service, even if that initial confusion is corrected by the time of purchase”) it could be argued that the listings amount to trademark infringement, via dilution. In addition, in both the above cases, a case for passing off could also be made.

Judicial support for brand owners can be found in the landmark case of L’Oreal v Bellure, involving the sale of smell-alike perfumes. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) had affirmed that comparative advertising may be disallowed “even where the use of a trademark is not capable of jeopardizing the essential function of the mark, which is to indicate the origin of the goods or services, provided that such use affects or is liable to affect one of the other functions of the mark.” Further, if “an advertiser…states explicitly or implicitly in comparative advertising that the product marketed by him is an imitation of a product bearing a well-known trade mark presents goods or services as imitations or replicas”, then  the “advantage gained by the advertiser as a result of such unlawful comparative advertising must be considered to be an advantage taken unfairly of the reputation of that mark.”

Nevertheless, when attempting to take down dupe listings, there is sometimes resistance from certain online platforms. For a start, such platforms only protect registered rights and insist on the production of trademark or design certificates. If a complaint seeks to protect unregistered rights and seeks recourse to the law of passing off or unfair competition, these platforms outrightly reject such an argument. Further, even where a brand owner does own valid trademark registrations, the platforms may not delist dupe products where the seller, in the platform’s view, has clarified that the dupe product emanates from a different manufacturer. In other words, in the platform’s opinion, where there is no confusion regarding the primary function (source function) of the seller’s trademark, there cannot be any infringement. Dilution-based arguments pertaining to the secondary function of the trademark are thus not acknowledged. Such cases commonly occur when dupes are advertised or reviewed by social media influencers in vlogs and reels, where the platform feels that sellers have adequately distinguished dupes from the original.

As an example, the Authentix online brand protection team recently filed a complaint before a leading video sharing platform, where a lookalike dress made by its client (let us say, ABC) was advertised by a fashion influencer in a reel as “Best ABC dupe”. To the chagrin of brand owners, there are certain jurisprudential fig leaves that dupe sellers and platforms can rely on. It is generally recognized by courts and legislation that a reference to a trademark, if in accordance with honest commercial practices, does not amount to trademark infringement. Moreover, elementary principles of free speech would protect an objective price comparison between two products. Many vloggers are thus canny enough to issue disclaimers and conditional statements to protect their sales pitches, sometimes even eliminate all references to the trademark of the original product. Frustratingly, for brand owners, platforms point to such statements while responding to takedown notices or when someone reports copyright infringement.

The legal chicanery employed by dupe sellers came to the fore in a case between Benefit Cosmetics and e.l.f. Cosmetics, decided by a US District Court. The court described both companies as catering to Gen Z influencers and relying on social media endorsements and reviews. Benefit had claimed that e.l.f.’s mascara product “Lash ‘N Roll” had infringed the trademark and trade dress of its mascara product “Roller Lash” (screenshots of both products, from Amazon, are reproduced below). Further, Benefit also used the term “Hook ‘N Roll” (a registered trademark owned by it) on its Roller Lash product.  In response, e.l.f. argued that any similarities were ‘mere cues’ to consumers that Lash ‘N Roll is an affordable alternative to Roller Lash.” In its ruling, the court described e.l.f.’s product as a dupe and acknowledged that it was inspired by Benefit’s product. The court also acknowledged that the word marks in question “look and sound similar”. Yet, the court still did not find trademark infringement. On the question of word mark infringement, the court pointed to dissimilarities in the appearance of the word marks on packaging, including Benefit’s prominent use of its house mark. With respect to trade dress infringement, the court stated: “Benefit clears the first hurdle of protectability, but it cannot demonstrate a likelihood of confusion.” The court suggested that evidence in the nature of consumer surveys was required “to show consumer confusion beyond the mere hypothetical.” The court also opined that the class of consumers buying the products in question were sophisticated enough not to be deceived, and that the difference in price between both products “would likely raise a consumer’s eyebrow.” The court remarked: “To the contrary, e.l.f. shows it intended to create a mass market curling mascara product under its brand name and brand qualities, at approximately a fifth of the price of Benefit’s prestige product.”

 

It should be pointed out that the above IP infringement case merely represents the decision of a single US judge. It is highly plausible that a court in another jurisdiction might have taken a less generous view of the defendant’s product. Further, there were facts and circumstances in the case that may not apply in other cases. Thus, in the end, a strategy to take down against dupe sellers and influencers must be assessed on a case-to-case basis. While cases of blatant counterfeiting and trademark infringement must be targeted aggressively, borderline cases should preferably be dealt with greater care. If platforms are non-responsive, brand owners could file test cases or send letters directly to sellers and influencers, ideally investigating the size, reach and influence wielded by each target in advance. In certain cases, an overly aggressive strategy may backfire, as certain influencers have cheekily mocked companies sending them cease-and-desist letters. Meanwhile, brand owners must continue to engage with platforms through advocacy forums, particularly impressing upon them to recognize dilution-based forms of trademark infringement and protect unregistered rights.

Protect Your Brand and Content Rights with Online Brand Protection

online brand protection

Fakes, dupes and diverted goods not only endanger brand revenue and consumer trust but can also put consumer health and safety at risk.

Authentix advises over 200 of the world’s leading brands, including Fortune 500 clients, on intellectual property related challenges in the digital world emanating not just from the conventional sphere of online marketplaces, but also more challenging arenas like social media platforms, NFT portals and the darknet. Authentix online brand protection solutions combine cutting-edge technological tools with expert analysis, enabling our clients to reduce infringements and counterfeits on online marketplaces, social media platforms and websites by up to 90%. Schedule a meeting with one of our brand protection experts today for services including:

• Tracking trademark infringement online and removing offers for fakes/ dupes

• Tracking pirated content online and removing infringing content

• Assisting with enforcement or settlement

• Support with legal research and drafting

• Specialized services in China

Download the PDF

Winning the Battle Against Counterfeit Apparel

     |     

In the retail and fashion industry, originality and brand loyalty are everything. With the quantity and quality of counterfeit products on the rise, the need for innovative brand protection solutions is critical for apparel and footwear brands. According to OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), fakes account for 3.3% of global trade ($509 billion), and clothing and footwear accounted for 38% of civil seizures. Counterfeit footwear and apparel make up a large share of the global counterfeit trade, with some estimates projecting up to 10% of all branded goods are counterfeit. There is a wide range of counterfeit methods affecting the apparel industry, from the use of labels in violation of trademark law, the use of popular characters from films and television shows in violation of copyright law, and the reproduction of signature logos and patterns in violation of industrial design law.

As a brand grows in following, bad actors are never far behind. Fake apparel can damage brand value, and often companies are left to deal with quality claims from substandard fakes, logo abuse, patent & copyright infringement and wide-ranging pricing violations. The difficulty in detecting physical shipments of counterfeit apparel & footwear makes online investigations and takedowns even more critically important.  In recent years, the presence of unauthorized online sellers has increased due to the prominence of social media influencers who may encourage their followers to purchase from these sites.

Our Solutions

Authentix is uniquely positioned to offer a large portfolio of the best-in-class, next generation physical, digital and online brand protection solutions for apparel and footwear brands.

Using AI and other advanced software, our online brand protection team monitors major global marketplaces and social media platforms to accurately detect fakes and then targets these counterfeiters through both online product takedowns and actionable intelligence reports to our clients. For merchandised product protection, our nano optic physical brand protection label and tag solutions deliver an exceptional blend of enhanced security enabling strong visual impact, consumer engagement, as customers can participate in the authentication process. Using a consumer smartphone, our digitally connected product lifecycle solution, DigiTrax™ allows digital authentication of products using a unique physical product tag.  This will allow visibility into product provenance, geo-location of authentication scans, and other important supply chain information. All this product journey data is collected and aggregated into a secure database providing actionable insights via customized reports.

Authentix represents several of the world’s major luxury watch, jewelry, sunglass, handbag, and wallet manufacturers and is well versed in the specific challenges of physical, digital and online brand protection for apparel and footwear brands in the fashion industry.

Physical Security

Our advanced overt and covert security features seamlessly integrate into hangtags, apparel labels, and footwear packaging, with applications available on multiple substrates that allow consumers to engage with the product to help ensure authentication. All level 1 products are backed by secure product authentication, track and trace capabilities, and visually compelling brand enhancing imagery.

   

Authentix also offers a range of covert markers, invisible machine-readable inks and taggants that can be printed on the packaging or label and are detectable with proprietary devices. Our covert solutions integrate authentication tactics throughout an entire brand protection program. These features are unknown to potential forgers and are very difficult, not economically feasible to replicate, adding another layer of integrity to your product.

Examples of our covert security features include:

• Covert taggants with handheld, machine readability and forensic analysis

• Secure thermal transfer ribbon with added covert security

• Digital fingerprinting of barcodes for smartphone authentication

• Hidden text and images only detectable through UV and or IR

   

Digital and Online Security

The Authentix Online Brand Protection team carefully monitors major global marketplaces and social media platforms for counterfeit clothing and footwear, and our experts work to enforce the intellectual property rights of well-known international brands through investigations and site takedowns. Our actionable business intelligence reports and combined offering of services have empowered offline raids to seize illicit products, civil litigation and criminal enforcement actions.

Authentix respects the brand owner’s devotion to delivering high quality and creative products to its customers. That is why many of the world’s leading luxury and fashion brands entrust their online brand protection needs to us. Authentix offers fashion brands an integrated brand protection solution that includes:

• 24/7 brand monitoring & online enforcement across over 500 online marketplaces, e-commerce platforms and social media sites

•  Expert analysis from our highly trained team helps track repeat infringement and monitor takedown performances

•  Intelligence services including actionable intelligence reports, test purchases, and many other unique services

Our experienced perspective and deep understanding of IP law, trademark protection and licensing is a cornerstone to provide the protection your luxury and fashion brand needs. Our holistic solutions are a perfect fit for key decision makers in the apparel, footwear, and accessory supply chain – from manufacturers and retailers to textile suppliers, testing labs, and more.

Traceability and Sustainability

This industry is witnessing a growing emphasis on sustainability and comprehensive supply chain traceability to promote ethical practices, reduce carbon footprints, ensure compliance, align with consumer demands, and drive long-term positive change.

Authentix continues to be an industry leader in corporate responsibility by focusing on sustainable offerings, and positive contributions to the communities where we operate, minimizing the impact on the environment, and prioritizing the health and development of employees while adhering to the highest ethical standard.

Additionally, our new Nano Optic platform provides brands with a sophisticated blend of the most advanced authentication optics and design expertise. Backed by serialization and track & trace capabilities, these nano optic, overt security features feature vivid visual effects that are nearly impossible to replicate or copy. Manufactured without inks, pigments, lenses or dyes, these multi-color nano optic materials are one of the most environmentally friendly and sustainable brand protection solutions available today.

Conclusion

To learn how Authentix can help with brand protection for fashion, apparel or footwear, schedule a consultation with one of our anti-counterfeit experts today. As an industry leader in authentication, our mission is to ensure the integrity of your brand..

Download the PDF

AI-Generated Visual Content and IP Challenges

     |     

This Authentix article has been published as a part of the Asia Video Industry Association’s Asia Video Report 2025. To learn more, please visit their website.

By Bharat Kapoor, Vice President, Online Brand Protection, Authentix

The creation of AI-generated visual content has profound implications for IP owners, especially in the context of copyright. When AI engines scrape images and videos to create new works, the critical question is whether such processing amounts to “reproduction” under copyright law. There also arises the vexed question of whether an AI-generated visual work is independently entitled to copyright protection. The few disputes that have so far reached courts have left many questions and concerns unaddressed. For example, in Getty Images v Stability AI (2023), Getty Images claimed before the UK High Court that Stability AI scraped millions of its copyrighted images to train its AI engine. While the court allowed the case to proceed to trial (finding that it involved a novel and previously undetermined question of law) it remains to be seen whether the parties decide to settle, thus scuttling the development of judicial guidelines on the subject. In Kneschke v LAION (2024), the Hamburg Regional Court in Germany rejected a similar claim by a stock image photographer against LAION, a non-profit AI company. Somewhat controversially, the court allowed LAION the benefit of an exemption normally reserved for research organizations. If courts begin to lean in this direction globally, copyright owners will struggle to be renumerated fairly. Given the deep links between certain non-profits and major tech companies, such an outcome might even be seen as patently unjust. Meanwhile, in Thaler v. Perlmutter (2023), the US District Court in Columbia upheld the US Copyright Office’s denial of copyright in an image created using AI, ruling that “human authorship” is a necessary ingredient of copyright ownership. But the ruling arguably fails to provide guidance in situations involving human authorship assisted by AI, or the highly creative use of an AI engine where the user goes beyond dictating mundane commands.

Alongside copyright, an overlooked area involves the use of trademarks in the creation of AI-generated visual content. To illustrate, Authentix Online Brand Protection conducted an experiment where multiple AI apps were instructed to create hundreds of images using well-known trademarks in (arguably) dilutionary contexts. The results were mixed. Some engines did not use the specified trademarks, contrary to our commands. Some slightly altered the specified trademarks and then used these versions. And some used all kinds of trademarks uninhibitedly, in contexts that would probably displease trademark owners (such as Ronald McDonald advertising KFC). Depending on context and jurisdiction, such uses might be prohibited as dilution/tarnishment, or permitted under fair use/criticism/parody exceptions.

In the end, AI can make the process of creating high-quality visual content quicker, easier, cheaper, more accessible and more scalable. This can benefit not only novice or low-budget content creators, but also large corporations wishing to expand their reach through social media. However, IP rights owners will likely argue in favor of laws and regulations governing the use of IP by AI engines. Rights owners may also advocate the adoption of licensing regimes (as a possible harbinger, OpenAI has reportedly been offering news organizations between USD 1 to 5 million in licensing fees to train its AI model). In both cases, copyright-related principles will probably be easier to concretize into laws and norms than trademark principles, and also receive higher prioritization. Yet, in all this, a fact that could be missed is that Western nations no longer monopolize the development of AI. AI engines that place IP owners at risk may well emanate from emerging Asian economies, with contrary viewpoints on the boundaries of IP protection. The bigger challenge for IP owners, therefore, may lie in ensuring the global acceptability of IP norms and the consent of governments and AI developers from emerging economies in the framing of such norms.

About Authentix Online Brand Protection

Authentix provides some of the world’s most recognizable brands with sophisticated online brand protection tools and services to address a broad range of online infringement and counterfeit risks. From global online surveillance and enforcement, online investigations and site takedowns, target verification, and even offline investigations, Authentix helps major brands proactively reduce the threat of counterfeit products being sold online. Our online brand protection solutions combine cutting-edge technological tools and expert analysis to reduce infringements for our clients on online marketplaces, social media platforms, and websites by up to 90%.
Want to see what Authentix OBP can do for your company? Our team is committed to working with you, understanding your unique challenges and requirements, and providing tailored solutions that best fit your industry and the unique challenges your brand faces that make a tangible difference to your brand. Schedule a consultation with one of our brand protection experts to learn more.

Bharat Kapoor, Vice President, Online Brand Protection, Authentix
Formerly the CEO of Strategic IP Information Pte, now a part of Authentix, Bharat has been focused on building effective global brand protection programs for over 250 brands across sectors such as fashion, FMCG, pharma, cosmetics, sporting goods wines, and spirits. He has led the development of the best-in-class machine learning-based online brand protection technology and developed effective global teams to investigate counterfeiting and piracy on the ground in China, Asia, and Latin America. Bharat Kapoor has a B.A. Honors from the University of Technology, Sydney. Prior to joining SIPI, he was an Associate Director at Ernst & Young India, where he led the business development and advisory services program for companies operating in the media, e-commerce, and advertising sectors.

Does the Arrest of Telegram Founder-CEO Pavel Durov have any Implications for IP Owners?

     |     

By Bharat Kapoor, Vice President, Online Brand Protection, Authentix

The arrest of Pavel Durov, the founder-CEO of Telegram, has sparked off a wave of criticism and conspiracy theories. An official press release reveals that Pavel (now out on bail) was arrested for the purpose of questioning, as part of a judicial investigation. The judicial investigation followed a preliminary enquiry by the Public Prosecutor Office, National Jurisdiction against Organised Crime (JUNALCO), and was opened against unnamed persons on various charges. These charges included complicity in connection with multiple criminal offences, namely the possession and distribution of child pornography, the sale of narcotics, the sale and distribution of hacking tools, and “organised fraud”; money laundering; offering cryptology services without prior declaration; and non-cooperation with authorities seeking to intercept communications.

Pavel Durov, Founder-CEO of Telegram*

It is, of course, rare for owners and operators of online platforms to face such criminal action — as opposed to users on the platform engaged in criminal activity. The few examples one can think of would only encompass outrightly rogue platforms whose primary intent was to facilitate illicit commerce, with the active approval and encouragement of its operators. Two notable cases that come to mind are Ross Ulbricht of the Silk Road marketplace (convicted by a Manhattan federal court and sentenced to life imprisonment) or Kim Dotcom of Megaupload (whose extradition order to the US was signed by New Zealand’s Justice minister in August). An interesting facet of those two cases is the role of IP infringement. In the former case, Ulbricht was convicted on seven counts (concerning drug trafficking, trafficking in fraudulent documents, computer hacking services and malware, money laundering and “continuing criminal enterprise”). However, a statement from the prosecutor’s office mentioned that Silk Road was also involved in disseminating “pirated media content”. In the case of Mega Upload, the case against Dotcom was almost entirely centered around copyright piracy, and the Court of Appeal in New Zealand found that Kim Dotcom could be extradited on that basis.

It is no one’s case that Durov and Telegram fall in the same class as the charges raised against Ulbricht/Silk Road and Dotcom/Mega Upload. In fact, Telegram does have a mechanism through which one can report illicit activity, however, the platform has been non-compliant to takedown requests placed by IP owners. In comparison, other social media platforms are known to have more accessible channels to address the concerns of IP owners. Since the French authorities still found it worth investigating Telegram and arresting Durov, it must be asked why IP infringement was missing from the list of allegations, given the alleged high frequency of pirated content on Telegram, as well as the reported presence of counterfeit sellers. In recent experience, about 20 percent of IP complaints that Authentix has filed with Telegram have been taken down. Even there, the response time has been slower than other platforms, which vitiates the ultimate goal of reducing counterfeit traffic. Further, unlike many other marketplaces, Telegram lacks a separate channel to fast-track complaints involving particularly blatant violations — such as outright counterfeits, or cases where an IP assessment is not warranted to determine if a sale is illegal, such as public sales of restricted goods like prescription medicines, alcohol and certain types of chemicals.

Objectively, there have been examples, notably in India, where Telegram has shared the details of users engaged in copyright piracy which was beneficial to investigation and enforcement. Yet, many of these instances only took place after a court order, and after Telegram had contested such claims on grounds of privacy and jurisdiction. Further, a system was introduced where one could open a Telegram account without a SIM card — which pirates and counterfeiters and other rogue actors are allegedly using to seek anonymity. In the end, what we believe Telegram should do is institute a formal, transparent pro-active mechanism through which IP infringements can be addressed; a similar mechanism through which sales involving public policy violations (independent of IP) can be addressed; and a system through which ads (often the first point of contact between a counterfeiter and a user) can be better monitored.

Looking ahead, it is likely that French authorities will continue and try to pressure Telegram to improve its compliance mechanisms, rather than determinedly seek to prosecute Durov personally, with the goal that Telegram will relent and agree to make these changes. Intriguingly, Telegram just recently changed the language on its FAQ page, from “All Telegram chats and group chats are private amongst their participants. We do not process any requests related to them” to now read “All Telegram apps have ‘Report’ buttons that let you flag illegal content for our moderators — in just a few taps.” Yet, if IP infringement continues to lag and Telegram does not make a serious effort to improve compliance, copyright and brand owners will feel justified in feeling hard done by.

About Authentix Online Brand Protection

Authentix provides some of the world’s most recognizable brands with sophisticated online brand protection tools and services to address a broad range of online infringement and counterfeit risks. From global online surveillance and enforcement, online investigations and site takedowns, target verification, and even offline investigations, Authentix helps major brands proactively reduce the threat of counterfeit products being sold online. Our online brand protection solutions combine cutting-edge technological tools and expert analysis to reduce infringements for our clients on online marketplaces, social media platforms, and websites by up to 90%.

* Image from artist Nick Lubushko

Protect Your Brand and Content Rights with Online Brand Protection

     |     

Authentix Online Brand Protection combines cutting-edge technology and expert analysis to reduce online infringements and counterfeits by up to 90%. Watch the video to learn more:

Ready to take action against infringing listings with Authentix Online Brand Protection? Schedule a consultation with our team today.



By clicking on the button below, I accept the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy as provided through the Authentix® website (www.authentix.com) including the use of individual personal data subject to the EU Data Privacy Act 2018 and General Data Protection Regulation (EU/GDPR)

Understanding the SHOP SAFE Act and How to Safeguard Your Brand

     |     

In the digital age, a brand’s reputation is a crucial asset and one of the greatest threats a brand faces is counterfeiting. Whether it’s a popular weight-loss drug like semaglutide or designer apparel, the counterfeit market is thriving and costing brands billions of dollars every year. The impact goes far beyond financial losses; it puts consumer health and safety at risk. Due to the rise in harmful counterfeit products across a variety of industries, the US Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property introduced the Stopping Harmful Offers on Platforms by Screening Against Fakes in E-Commerce (SHOP SAFE) Act. The SHOP SAFE Act is legislation aimed at reducing the volume of counterfeit sales online. It includes provisions such as holding platforms accountable for counterfeits that endanger consumer health and safety, requiring them to verify and display sellers’ identity and contact information, and terminating the accounts of repeat infringers.

Criticisms to the SHOP SAFE Act have led to the realization among lawmakers and courts that striking a balance between safe harbor principles and responsibilities is necessary, given the health and safety risks associated with counterfeit products.

The Impact of Widespread Counterfeit Pharmaceuticals

The surge in counterfeit pharmaceuticals such as semaglutide, better known under the commercial brand name Ozempic, has resulted in consumers falling seriously ill after purchasing these fake products online. After a huge surge in demand for the drug in 2023, pharmacies have struggled to keep it in stock and counterfeiters have taken advantage of the lack of availability by flooding the internet with fake semaglutide. Healthcare agencies in the UK have reported multiple cases of consumers falling seriously ill after purchasing counterfeit semaglutide online. Recently, a BBC investigation similarly uncovered cases of consumers buying counterfeit semaglutide pens from sellers on Instagram, WhatsApp and TikTok, with some ending up being hospitalized. Another example comes from Austria where several patients injected with suspected counterfeit semaglutide were hospitalized after suffering from hypoglycemia and seizures. This reality underscores the importance of the SHOP SAFE Act and why brand protection is no longer a choice but a necessity for businesses and consumer protection.Successful Online Brand Protection Solutions by Authentix

To dig deeper into the extent of the counterfeit semaglutide market, Authentix Online Brand Protection (OBP) scanned multiple platforms and found several suspicious listings of semaglutide across social media and messaging apps and online marketplaces.

In the absence of a detailed investigation, it is difficult to establish which of these products are counterfeit and governments and the industry would benefit from investigating such listings in greater detail. For example, many suspicious listings found by Authentix OBP contained clickbait hashtags like #weightloss and #ozempic. These could serve as a starting point for an investigation. Further, selling even genuine semaglutide without a prescription is an offence in most jurisdictions. Listings of such a nature should automatically be taken down by platforms without insistence on documentation such as IP registration certificates. Similarly, parallel imports should also be treated by platforms as serious cases, not least because these products may be tampered with and may also contain literature in languages not native to the country of sale. The same goes for a significant reduction in retail price — a common tactic employed by rogue sellers to lure consumers. To truly bust the counterfeit semaglutide market, however, will require a sustained cross-border effort that targets known high-risk marketplaces and platforms, and eventually results in physical investigations and enforcement actions.

The Importance of Counterfeit Prevention

Authentix OBP recommends brands check a wide range of sites for infringing products as new listings and new marketplaces for counterfeit goods pop up every day. Between constant monitoring of online marketplaces and e-commerce sites, implementing cutting-edge technology to detect infringing listings, and expert-led takedowns of counterfeit listings, a full online brand protection solution helps brands protect their company and customers from counterfeiters.

The SHOP SAFE Act places an obligation on companies to protect their consumers, and Authentix OBP equips brands with the power and tools to do so – a perfect synergy for safeguarding your brand’s integrity and keeping consumers safe.

About Authentix Online Brand Protection

Authentix provides some of the world’s most recognizable brands with sophisticated online brand protection tools and services to address a broad range of online infringement and counterfeit risks. From global online surveillance and enforcement, online investigations and site takedowns, target verification, and even offline investigations, Authentix helps major brands proactively reduce the threat of counterfeit products being sold online. Our online brand protection solutions combine cutting-edge technological tools and expert analysis to reduce infringements for our clients on online marketplaces, social media platforms, and websites by up to 90%.

Want to see what Authentix OBP can do for your company? Our team is committed to working with you, understanding your unique challenges and requirements, and providing tailored solutions that best fit your industry and the unique challenges your brand faces that make a tangible difference to your brand. Schedule a consultation with one of our brand protection experts to learn more. 

Q&A on Intellectual Property Protection & Enforcement

     |     

By Bharat Kapoor, Vice President, Online Brand Protection, Authentix

The International Anti-Counterfeiting Coalition (IACC) recently asked our VP of Online Brand Protection, Bharat Kapoor, his thoughts on intellectual property protection and enforcement and here’s what he shared:

What are the top 2 challenges in IP enforcement you see affecting your industry over the next year?

On the one hand, as online sales occur in an omni-channel environment, brands need to focus on collecting and analyzing the right set of data to make connections and take down infringing distribution channels collectively. On the other hand, ecommerce marketplaces and social media are making it increasingly difficult for brands to access sellers on their platform, with search and enforcement tools becoming less effective at tackling the range of issues online. Brand protection teams need to address these challenges by having targeted strategies supported with data and insights to deliver results and to avoid being overly reliant with on-ground investigators.

Can you provide your top 2 best practices for protecting IP?

Intellectual property protection and enforcementFirst, it is important to have registered IP rights and the ability to authenticate products efficiently. Second, the ability to collect and analyze high-quality data and manage a range of enforcement activity efficiently across hundreds of marketplaces globally is the most important factor in protecting IP. Authentix’s online brand protection solution and service platform gives our clients the ability to find and connect activities on a range of issues across ecommerce channels and further enables our global services team to manage these brand protection activities at scale. We also have active channels of communication with marketplaces to continuously address online threats collaboratively, and actively call out their lack of cooperation publicly.

What hobbies or causes are you passionate about?

We are deeply committed towards sustainability and Authentix Inc. has funded numerous environmental and educational projects in Africa, South America, and many other communities we serve. We have also implemented best practices on sustainability within the global organization. We have been following industry discussions on upcycling of counterfeit goods, and we have supported our clients in building strategies in certain countries. We are passionate about using our skills to support causes that positively impact the environment and conducting investigations into issues such as the illegal trafficking of birds and wildlife. Delivering results on projects such as these reenergizes me and our team to continue to fight against illegal activities online.

Want to learn more about how Authentix can help protect against intellectual property infringement? Schedule a consultation with our brand protection experts today.

Bharat Kapoor, Vice President, Online Brand Protection, Authentix
Formerly the CEO of Strategic IP Information Pte, now a part of Authentix, Bharat has been focused on building effective global brand protection programs for over 250 brands across sectors such as fashion, FMCG, pharma, cosmetics, sporting goods wines, and spirits. He has led the development of the best-in-class machine learning-based online brand protection technology and developed effective global teams to investigate counterfeiting and piracy on the ground in China, Asia, and Latin America. Bharat Kapoor has a B.A. Honors from the University of Technology, Sydney. Prior to joining SIPI, he was an Associate Director at Ernst & Young India, where he led the business development and advisory services program for companies operating in the media, e-commerce, and advertising sectors.

Digital Avatars and the Perils of IP Infringement

     |     

By Bharat Kapoor, Vice President, Online Brand Protection, Authentix

One of the visible recent trends online has been the rise of realistic, AI-generated celebrity avatars. These may take myriad forms (from 3D animations to chatbots) and are generated using a variety of AI technologies (including publicly available apps like Silver Studio and Lensa). Many well-known figures have jumped on the bandwagon and commercialized their AI avatars through strategic partnerships with brands and social media platforms — from Snoop Dogg and Kendall Jenner (partnering with Meta) to Slovenian NBA star Luka Dončić (who has commissioned a digital doppelgänger that can interact with fans on TikTok). In South Korea, an entire K-Pop band “Eternity” has been artificially created by a technology company, using deepfake and motion capture technology.

Legal Precedents Protecting LikenessDigital IP Infringement

The emerging trend of digital avatars brings with it several potential intellectual Property (IP) risks. These risks include false endorsement (by using an avatar to promote an unlicensed product); reputational damage (by using deepfake technology to make a celebrity appear to say or do something unsavory); or straightforward copyright infringement (by copying videos and images, which could then be commercially exploited in various ways, from use in NFTs to social media pages). There are judicial precedents on personality rights worldwide, including in cases preceding the internet, that can prevent wrongful appropriation. For example, in Midler v Ford Motor Co (1988), the singer Bette Midler sued Ford for using a “sound-alike” singer to imitate her voice in a series of commercials. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in her favor, under a California tort statute that prohibited the use of a person’s “name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness, in any manner.” Subsequent cases in the US, UK, and many other countries, have reaffirmed the decision to protect public figures from unauthorized use of their image, likeness, or voice in advertisements or endorsements without their permission. Among recent cases, in April 2023, the Chinese Hangzhou Internet Court ruled that the image and related videos of “Ada”, an AI character created by a Chinese tech company, enjoyed protection under Chinese copyright law. The court further ruled that the defendant had engaged in unfair competition by using Ada’s images and videos to promote products on Douyin.

How To Protect Against Digital Infringement

While international precedents are undoubtedly helpful in protecting digital avatars and personality rights globally, at least two significant challenges remain. First, detecting the misuse of avatars can be difficult in cases where such misuse is widespread (often because rights owners have allowed the problem to fester). Such cases may require scanning hundreds of pages and sending an equivalent number of takedown requests. Second, stemming from the first, not all platforms may be receptive to cooperating with takedown requests. For example, relying solely on case law from foreign jurisdictions, in the absence of a domestic statute clearly recognizing personality rights, may not sway certain platforms to remove infringing products. Some platforms also insist on documentation and certain IP offices may not issue certificates explicitly recognizing personality rights. It is also plausible that some misappropriated avatars may deliberately include dissimilarities in order to resist takedowns. Platforms may also construe certain uses as falling within the realm of fair use, especially if such use is in contexts that are not outrightly commercial. These problems can be suitably addressed by using advanced IP surveillance software, supplemented by a team of experts handling the complex takedown requests, escalating issues to executives, and supplying robust legal reasoning. In the end, the misappropriation of avatars is still a relatively recent problem, and the attitudes of platforms are yet to be discerned. Nevertheless, experience shows that the above problems are highly plausible, which should cause rights owners to be both vigilant and realistic on matters of enforcement.

Authentix Online Brand Protection

Authentix provides some of the world’s most recognizable brands with sophisticated online brand protection tools and services to address a broad range of online infringement and counterfeit risks. From global online surveillance and enforcement, online investigations and site takedowns, target verification, and even offline investigations, Authentix helps major brands to proactively reduce the threat of unauthorized likeness use and IP infringement. Our online brand protection solutions combine cutting-edge technological tools and expert analysis to reduce infringements for our clients on online marketplaces, social media platforms, and websites by up to 90%. If you’re curious how Authentix Online Brand Protection can help protect against intellectual property infringement, schedule a consultation with our brand protection experts today. 

Bharat Kapoor, Vice President, Online Brand Protection, Authentix
Formerly the CEO of Strategic IP Information Pte, now a part of Authentix, Bharat has been focused on building effective global brand protection programs for over 250 brands across sectors such as fashion, FMCG, pharma, cosmetics, sporting goods wines, and spirits. He has led the development of the best-in-class machine learning-based online brand protection technology and developed effective global teams to investigate counterfeiting and piracy on the ground in China, Asia, and Latin America. Bharat Kapoor has a B.A. Honors from the University of Technology, Sydney. Prior to joining SIPI, he was an Associate Director at Ernst & Young India, where he led the business development and advisory services program for companies operating in the media, e-commerce, and advertising sectors.

Are Companies Held Liable For Fake Products? Video Perspective

     |     

Did you know brand owners may be held liable for counterfeit products if they are unable to prove certain products are authentic or counterfeit? Learn how to protect your brand from counterfeit products damaging your reputation in this video perspective.

Is Your Brand at Risk from Online Counterfeiters in China?

     |     

If your brand has experienced increasing difficulty enforcing trademarks and protecting intellectual property on Chinese online marketplaces and social media platforms, you’re not alone. Authentix represents some of the world’s largest and most recognizable brands with online brand protection solutions. Our team uses cutting-edge monitoring technology and expert analysis to provide customized online brand protection services including online monitoring, IP enforcement, and offline investigations to take down counterfeit listings on major online marketplaces, social media platforms, and e-commerce sites.

We provide our clients an integrated online brand protection solution unique to each company and industry that includes:

  • Tracking trademark infringement online and removing offers for fake products
  • Tracking pirated content online and removing infringing content
  • Conducting offline investigations
  • Assisting with enforcement or settlement
  • Supporting with legal research and drafting
  • Specialized services in China

Our machine-learning tools scan data from over 500 online marketplaces, platforms, and mobile apps — around the world and around the clock, identifying clusters of highly counterfeited products and major sites of counterfeiting. Authentix has proven to successfully reduce infringements and counterfeits on online marketplaces, social media platforms, and e-commerce websites by up to 90%. 

Online Brand Protection from Chinese Counterfeiters

Online Brand Protection Team in China

Authentix has a dedicated online brand protection team in China that conducts investigations both online (including through unique, crowdsourced WeChat and WhatsApp investigations) and offline. If your brand has ever come across counterfeiters originating from China, you’re not alone. Over 75% of counterfeit and pirated goods seized by US Customs originate from China. Brand owners all over the world frequently find their intellectual property unlawfully shown on Chinese ecommerce and social media platforms which serve as major distribution networks for counterfeit goods.

 

Enforcing your trademark in China can be incredibly problematic due to language and translation difficulties and challenges in Chinese trademark law. Our online brand protection experts specialize in enforcing IP rights in China. We have put together a free eBook to guide you through what you need to know to ensure your brand is protected from counterfeiters, including our top recommendations for brand owners. Click here to download your free guide to online brand protection in China.

Trust Your Online Brand Protection to Authentix

If you’re curious how Authentix Online Brand Protection can help protect your brand from illicit online activity in China and beyond, schedule a consultation with our brand protection experts today. 

Back To Top