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

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.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 16, 2026
Indonesia’s Ministry of Law has introduced a new framework for patent applications that tightens filing requirements and introduces formal mechanisms for accelerated examination. Minister of Law Regulation No. 6 of 2026 on Patent Applications, which was issued on January 13, 2026, and took effect on February 23, 2026, serves as the implementing regulation for Law No. 65 of 2024 on Patents. It replaces the previous patent application framework (under Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 38 of 2018, as amended by Regulation No. 13 of 2021), which was considered no longer aligned with current legal, institutional, and technological developments. The regulation also reflects the institutional restructuring of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights into the Ministry of Law. Patent applications filed on or after February 23, 2026, must fully comply with the new regulation. Applications that were filed before this date will continue to be examined and processed under the previous regulation, pursuant to transitional provisions. Substantive Changes Definition of Invention The definition of “Invention” now explicitly includes systems, methods, and uses, in addition to products and processes. This expansion creates broader protection opportunities, particularly for software-enabled, digital, and method-based technologies, although it may also result in closer scrutiny during substantive examination. Excess Claims Fee Excess claims fees must now be paid at the time of filing. Failure to pay excess claims fees at filing results in the application being deemed withdrawn. There is no longer an option to defer payment to the substantive examination stage. This amendment forces applicants to face higher upfront costs. Patent claim strategy must be finalized prior to filing, reducing flexibility at later stages. Procedural and System Changes Fully Electronic Filing Patent applications must be filed electronically via the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) online filing system. Assisted filings to
March 13, 2026
For decades, intellectual property rights holders seeking to eliminate counterfeit goods from the Thai market have relied primarily on criminal raid actions to seize infringing products and hold infringers accountable. The deterrent value of this approach is typically threefold: imposing criminal liability on infringers, removing counterfeit goods from circulation, and subjecting violators to imprisonment and fines. However, these outcomes often fall short of fulfilling brand owners’ broader objectives. In many cases, those prosecuted are merely staff or intermediaries rather than the principals orchestrating the infringing operations. Moreover, any fines imposed are remitted to the Thai government—not to the rights holders who have suffered commercial harm and invested substantial resources in investigation and coordination with law enforcement authorities. As in other jurisdictions worldwide, rights holders seeking monetary compensation for IP infringement in Thailand have traditionally pursued separate civil litigation. Before initiating such proceedings, a brand owner must gather sufficient evidence to establish both the infringement and the resulting damages. Notably, Thai law does not recognize punitive damages; courts award only actual damages proven by the claimant. In the absence of seized infringing goods, the damages awarded in such cases are typically minimal. This all leaves rights holders with limited recourse despite possibly having suffered significant commercial injury. In 2005, Thailand amended its Criminal Procedure Code to introduce Section 44/1, which enables rights holders to claim damages within criminal proceedings at the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court prior to the evidentiary hearing. In practice, this mechanism allows an injured party to submit a petition for civil damages directly within the criminal case initiated by the public prosecutor. Historically, rights holders in Thailand have been reluctant to use Section 44/1 because the compensation awarded by courts was often insufficient to justify the effort. However, recent years have seen a notable shift
March 13, 2026
Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property (IP Law) has undergone continuous amendment in recent years, with the latest amendment issued at the end of 2025. Among the amended and supplemented provisions, the regulation that has perhaps attracted the most attention is a provision relating to the use of protected IP objects by artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Specifically, Article 7 of the 2025 IP Law introduces a completely new Clause 5, which reads in full as follows: “Organizations and individuals are permitted to use texts and data relating to intellectual property objects that have been lawfully published, and which the public is allowed to access, for the purposes of scientific research, experimentation, and training of artificial intelligence systems, provided that such use will not unreasonably affect the legitimate rights and interests of the authors and intellectual property rights holders in accordance with this Law. With respect to texts and data that are objects protected by copyright and related rights, the use of the texts and data as set forth herein must also be in accordance with the regulations of the Government.” Analyzing this newly added provision in the context of how it was conceived, as well as the challenges that still lie ahead, can provide some interesting insights. From Aspirations to Flight in Science and Technology From the end of 2024 and throughout 2025—the 50th anniversary of the country’s reunification—Vietnam witnessed numerous sweeping changes in many areas, including legislative development. It could be said that no sessions of the National Assembly have ever adopted as many laws, resolutions, and major policies as this one. The aspirations of the highest-level leadership have been concretized into major law and policy projects, which were drafted, developed, and passed at record speed. All of this was aimed at building a foundation for Vietnam to achieve
March 10, 2026
Indonesia’s trademark prosecution process has been significantly streamlined with Ministry of Law Regulation No. 5 of 2026 (MOLR 5/2026) coming into effect on February 23, 2026. In straightforward cases without opposition, applicants may now see their trademarks proceed to registration within three months from filing—a substantial improvement over previous practice. The regulation also introduces detailed procedures for recording changes of name and address and for transferring rights over pending applications. It enhances the role of the Ministry of Law’s regional offices in assisting local individuals and SMEs, adds provisions governing force majeure situations, implements new requirements for collective trademarks, and formalizes several practices already in place. Substantive Examination Acceleration The most significant change under MOLR 5/2026 concerns substantive examination. The regulation now explicitly requires that applications be published within 15 days of filing, followed by a two-month publication period. Oppositions must be filed only within this window; late submissions will not be processed, even if the system accepts payment. The new regulation requires the Trademark Office (TMO) to forward copies of any opposition to applicants within 14 days of receipt. If no opposition is filed, substantive examination begins immediately after the publication period ends and will be completed within 30 days. If an opposition is filed, the examination is to be finalized within 90 days of the counterstatement filing date. These timelines enable unopposed applications to move from close of publication to final decision in roughly one month. If an application is provisionally refused during ex officio examination, the applicant has 30 working days from the date of notification to file a response. However, the regulation does not specify the timeline for subsequent reexamination after the response is filed. In recent practice, the TMO has been completing reexamination within approximately two to three months. Ownership Recordals May Pause Substantive