You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

January 22, 2022

The Fight against Counterfeits Online: Perspectives from an E-commerce Platform

Subscribe to Updates

In this guest piece, Andy Chua, senior vice president of the Lazada IP Rights (IPR) Protection Team, reveals how Southeast Asia’s leading e-commerce platform protects IP rights online while meeting rights holders’ needs for efficiency and responsiveness. This article, which was first published in World Trademark Review, is the first in a two-part series about trademark enforcement against online counterfeits.

 

It is no secret that online marketplaces have experienced rapid growth due to the digitalisation of retail and related fields. This rapid development has unfortunately also created an additional avenue for bad actors to distribute counterfeit goods to largely unaware consumers—thereby causing losses and reputational damage to brands associated with these counterfeit products. As Southeast Asia’s leading e-commerce platform, Lazada has long prioritised protecting the IP rights of brands and sellers on our platforms and has invested in safeguards that ensure consumers can shop and transact with confidence on Lazada.

In March 2019, Lazada established the IPR Protection Team, which is charged with the mission of developing a comprehensive IP rights protection programme at Lazada. To our knowledge, Lazada is the only e-commerce company in Southeast Asia with a team dedicated to addressing rights holders’ IP concerns. Beyond the initial setting up of the dedicated IPR Protection Team, Lazada continues to invest significantly in human resources and technology infrastructure to meet rights holders’ needs for efficiency and responsiveness. Presently, more than 30 people are employed full time and assigned to this effort.

The IP rights protection programme at Lazada comprises four core components:

  • a strict IP rights policy;
  • merchant education;
  • technology-driven governance; and
  • stakeholder collaboration.

Strict IP rights policy

On each of the six Lazada country platforms, the IP rights policy is publicly available in the respective local language and clearly sets out the types of listings that would violate Lazada’s IP policy. Generally, the policy prohibits the listing of IP-infringing products or services or using trademark or copyright-infringing content within a listing.

Merchant education

Lazada strongly supports merchants to grow their businesses on the platform in a fair and sustainable way that safeguards consumer interests and the rights of other sellers. This is why Lazada invests in merchant education to maintain rigorous platform governance and ensure that all merchants are schooled in lawful practices and made well aware of the platform’s terms and conditions. This education is an essential part of the merchant onboarding process.

All new merchants undergo a series of educational modules through the web-based Lazada University. Through these modules, merchants learn about Lazada’s platform policies, including those relating to IP rights. Merchants are informed of the consequences of noncompliance, which include escalating penalties that could lead to account suspension and/or termination.

Technology-driven governance – the IPP Platform

As of June 2019, Lazada sites have been integrated within a web-based portal, known as the IPP Platform. This allows rights holders to register enforcement accounts, submit takedown requests and monitor the status of the takedown requests led across all six markets in which Lazada operates. The IPP Platform also serves as a repository for IP rights documents. Rights holders only need to upload the necessary documents once, when they submit the first takedown request. Thereafter, their information and IP rights documents are logged in the system and ready for use in relation to future (relevant) takedown requests.

The IPP Platform is a technological tool developed by the Alibaba Group and is highly beneficial in driving efficiencies around the processing of takedown requests by rights holders. While the IPP Platform also supports the submission of takedown requests for other e-commerce platforms within the Alibaba Group (ie, 1688.com, Alibaba.com, AliExpress, Taobao, Tmall and Tmall Global), the review and processing of takedown requests directed at listings on Lazada platforms is carried out independently by the Lazada IPR Protection Team and in accordance with Lazada’s own set of review and processing guidelines.

Through the IPP Platform, Lazada is able to process takedown requests expeditiously. From July 2020 to June 2021, 98% of takedown requests were processed within three business days. The number of takedown requests processed increased by 22%, while the average processing time per takedown request decreased by 31% year on year.

Stakeholder collaboration

Lazada understands that effective IP protection requires targeting the physical sources of counterfeit goods, not just the online platforms where they are sold. This is why Lazada is a strong supporter and collaborator when it comes to working with rights holders and local law enforcement agencies in online investigations and enforcement actions all the way up the supply chain—sending a clear message to manufacturers and distributors of counterfeit products that Lazada platforms are off limits.

From July 2020 to June 2021, Lazada partnered with multiple rights holders, trade associations and local law enforcement agencies on several online enforcement actions, which led to almost 100,000 counterfeit goods being seized.

Notably, an enforcement raid in Thailand in May 2021—which yielded more than 82,000 counterfeit Panasonic batteries – was the rights holder’s largest seizure in Southeast Asia to date. The batteries were intended for sale on various e-commerce platforms.

Lazada also actively participated in Operation Pangea XIV—a global enforcement operation coordinated by INTERPOL from 18 to 25 May 2021, targeting the sale of counterfeit and illicit medicines and medical products. The operation involved police, customs and health regulatory authorities from 92 countries. Through Lazada’s collaboration with INTERPOL and the relevant local authorities, enforcement actions in the Philippines led to the seizure of various counterfeit health supplements.

As well as collaborating with law enforcement and rights holders, at Lazada we also organise our own events to engage stakeholders in discussions about IP protection. Rights holders can provide feedback directly to Lazada, share best practices and learn about how Lazada protects their IP rights. As an example, Lazada held a hybrid IP protection workshop on 3 March 2021, where guest speakers included representatives from Under Armour, Eli Lily and the Pharmaceutical Security Institute. The event was attended by more than 70 people and received positive reviews from many of the attendees.

Building a platform for everyone

A robust platform IP rights protection programme benefits everyone, including SMEs. During Lazada’s celebration of World IP Day this year, one of Lazada’s SME merchants, Adrian Goh, manager of the White Magic store on Lazada, spoke about how Lazada’s efforts in creating a safe and secure environment help businesses to thrive.

“After we reported the counterfeit products and got them progressively removed, we actually saw a significant increase in our sales, somewhere close to 30%,” Goh said, “because when the counterfeits are removed, the buyers will go back to buying the original brands”.

As illustrated by Goh, having clear and stringent IP policies in place, which are clearly communicated to users, combined with an efficient reporting and takedown system, are the key building blocks of a robust IP rights protection programme that will benefit businesses. In addition, an overall readiness to review and develop new processes or solutions through close collaboration with rights holders, policymakers, law enforcement agencies, industry associations and even other platforms will be critical in addressing and overcoming complex and pervasive issues, making the online world a safer place to transact for all.

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 24, 2026
Indonesia has updated its fee framework for intellectual property (IP)-related government services, with implications for IP owners, licensees, lenders, digital platforms, and businesses operating in the country. Government Regulation No. 30 of 2026 on Types and Tariffs of Non-Tax State Revenue Applicable to the Ministry of Law (GR 30/2026) was promulgated on July 2, 2026, and will take effect on August 1, 2026. Key Takeaways GR 30/2026, which replaces the relevant IP service fees under Government Regulation No. 45 of 2024, reorganizes the fee schedule into separate categories for copyright, industrial designs, patents, layout designs of integrated circuits, trade secrets, trademarks, geographical indications, IP enforcement, and other categories. The most commercially relevant changes include a new copyright recordation tariff exemption for songs and music, higher fees for several trademark and geographical indication services, new IP enforcement service fees, and a new fee type for registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects. In addition, this is the first major update for trademark fees in approximately 10 years. GR 30/2026 is significant not only as a fee update but also as a further indication of Indonesia’s increasing recognition of IP as a financeable commercial asset. By expressly assigning fees to the registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects, the regulation places IP-backed collateral filings within the Ministry of Law’s administrative service framework. While GR 30/2026 does not create a new secured-transactions regime, this development is relevant for lenders, borrowers, and IP owners structuring financing arrangements secured by trademarks, patents, copyrights, industrial designs, or other registrable IP rights in Indonesia. Copyright: New Fee Exemption for Songs and Music Recordation For copyright, GR 30/2026 creates a fee-exempt category for recordation of works or related-rights products for songs or music, while maintaining a separate category for other works and related-rights products. It
Read More
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
Read More
July 15, 2026
Ambush marketing refers to a strategy in which a business associates itself with an event, campaign, or brand without paying for official sponsorship rights. The tactic is most visible in sports, concerts, and festivals, where official sponsors have invested substantially for exclusivity. Ambush marketers may use suggestive wording, event-themed imagery, athlete endorsements, venue-adjacent promotions, or social media campaigns implying a commercial connection with the event. Common Forms of Ambush Marketing Ambush marketing typically takes one of the following forms: Direct ambushing: using event names, logos, or mascots suggesting authorization Coattail ambushing: sponsoring an athlete or broadcaster connected with the event Subtle ambushing: themed advertising, venue-adjacent campaigns, or similar visual cues The legal analysis in each case turns on whether the marketing crosses from permissible event-based advertising into infringement, passing off, deception, or wrongful exploitation of goodwill, and the risk assessment is necessarily fact-specific. Thailand has no dedicated ambush marketing statute, so legality depends on execution. A campaign that merely comments on a public event may be permissible, but one that uses protected marks, creates consumer confusion, misrepresents sponsorship status, or makes unsubstantiated claims may trigger liability under various Thai laws, as laid out below. Ambush Marketing and Thailand’s Trademark Act The Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) is the primary tool for addressing campaigns that use registered trademarks, event names, logos, mascots, or confusingly similar signs. The law gives registered trademark owners the exclusive right to use their mark for registered goods, and infringement risk arises when a nonsponsor uses an event mark or a confusingly similar sign in advertising. Even referential or playful use may create liability if it causes public confusion as to sponsorship or commercial connection. The law also preserves passing-off claims for unregistered marks. This matters because event names, taglines, or mascots may not always be
Read More
July 13, 2026
When Decree No. 186/2026/ND-CP (Decree 186) takes effect on July 15, 2026, it will introduce the most significant reform of Vietnam’s administrative IP enforcement framework since Decree 99/2013/ND-CP was issued in 2013. These changes are expected to make administrative enforcement faster, more accessible, and better suited to the realities of modern IP disputes. Below are the principal reforms and their practical implications for rights holders and enforcement practitioners. The End of Notarization and Consular Legalization Among the most welcome procedural changes is the abolition of the notarization and consular legalization requirement for powers of attorney (POA) submitted in administrative enforcement proceedings. Under the previous regime, foreign rights holders were generally required to execute a POA, then have it notarized and consular legalized (if seeking customs recordal). In practice, this process frequently delayed enforcement by four to eight weeks, often long enough for infringing goods to disappear before authorities could intervene. Decree 186 removes this bottleneck, now requiring only an original or certified copy of the POA. If the document is in a foreign language, a Vietnamese translation is sufficient, provided it is certified by a competent authority or confirmed by the authorized Vietnamese IP representative. Consular legalization and notarization are no longer required. For rights holders, the practical impact is substantial. Administrative enforcement files that previously took weeks to prepare can now be completed in a matter of days, allowing much faster responses in time-sensitive matters such as warehouse raids, border interventions, and trade-fair enforcement. The decree also introduces a useful administrative simplification. Where an original POA has already been submitted to the same enforcement authority and remains valid, applicants may rely on a copy of that earlier submission by identifying the previous case file. This eliminates unnecessary duplication for rights holders pursuing multiple enforcement actions before the same
Read More