Removing counterfeit goods from a marketplace: what evidence the platform accepts

Why marketplaces require proof

The marketplace acts as an intermediary between the seller and the rightsholder. Therefore, it cannot automatically remove a product based solely on a statement from one party.

To make a decision in favor of the rightsholder, the platform must verify three aspects:

1. the applicant holds the rights to the brand;

2. the specific seller is indeed infringing on these rights;

3. the infringement is documented.

If even one aspect raises doubts, the complaint may be dismissed.

1. Documents confirming rights to the brand

The first and basic level of evidence is confirmation that you are indeed the right holder. As a rule, to confirm rights to a brand, marketplaces accept the following set of documents:

• trademark registration certificate and/or data from the state register of trademarks (service marks);

• a license agreement, if an official distributor of the right holder is applying;

• a power of attorney, if a representative of the right holder is applying.

Without these documents, a complaint may be rejected even for obvious counterfeit goods, as the marketplace protects not the brand itself, but the legally confirmed right to it.

2. Recording the disputed product page

The next critical element is documenting the violation at the moment it is discovered. Marketplace product listings are dynamic: sellers can change the title, images, price, or even delete the product entirely. Therefore, it is important to save the link to the product listing, take screenshots of the pages showing the title, image, and product description - including the price and SKU - and record the seller's information. All these materials help prove that the violation existed at a specific point in time.

3. Confirmation of the fact of trademark use

Marketplaces do not evaluate an abstract claim that "my brand is being used," but rather specific methods of use - in the product name, description, images, packaging, or visual design. The more precisely the method of use is specified, the easier it is for the platform to confirm the violation.

4. Comparison with the original product

In some cases, it is particularly important to demonstrate the difference between original products and suspicious goods. This is relevant when dealing with counterfeit items rather than simple resale.

Evidence may include photographs of the original product, official brand images, distinctive packaging features, as well as discrepancies in labeling or quality. Such a comparison helps to show that the items in question are not legal products, but counterfeits.

5. Representation of the absence of the right holder's consent

A seller's lack of authorization does not necessarily mean they are an infringer. However, marketplaces often take this fact into account when resolving disputes; therefore, it is recommended to assure the platform that the seller is not an official distributor of the right holder. To do this, one can provide a list of official dealers and information regarding license agreements registered with Rospatent. Combined with other evidence, this strengthens the right holder's position.

6. Additional materials

In addition to the required minimum, additional documents can be provided to strengthen the overall evidence base:

• correspondence with the unscrupulous seller;

• test purchases of the goods;

• customer reviews indicating signs of a counterfeit;

• expert opinions (if necessary).

Such materials are particularly important in disputed situations where the seller contests the violation.

How to increase the chances of removing counterfeit goods

An effective complaint is not just a report of a violation, but a structured evidentiary position. The better the collection of evidence is organized, the higher the probability of a quick removal of the counterfeit product from the platform.

In practice, the following combination of documents works best:

• confirmed brand rights;

• full documentation of the disputed product listing;

• indication of specific methods of illegal trademark use;

• visual or documentary comparison of the counterfeit product with the original;

• additional supporting materials.

At the same time, removing a single listing does not always solve the problem. The fight against counterfeiting often turns into a constant process of monitoring and response. This is why companies are increasingly using systemic solutions that help not only to record violations but also to manage the entire workflow cycle. For example, the ZIPDetect platform allows for the integration of monitoring, documentation, and complaint handling into a single system.