The MARQUES Anti-Counterfeiting and Parallel Trade Team has published a new report examining the legal frameworks and challenges in regulating counterfeit sales on cross-border e-commerce (CBEC) platforms across 47 jurisdictions worldwide.

The 24-page report has been prepared in cooperation between the Cross-Border E-commerce and Counterfeit Goods and the Online Brand Protection sub-teams. It is available to download on the Team's page here (MARQUES log-in required).

Based on structured surveys of legal professionals in each jurisdiction, the report sheds light on legal measures, operational challenges, and potential strategies for enhancing enforcement mechanisms across different regions. It covers key topics including takedown measures, staydown enforcement, whitelisting, jurisdiction over non-residents, available legal remedies, obstacles, and protection levels.

Key findings at a glance

• Takedown measures are now a widely recognised baseline, with 89% of surveyed jurisdictions confirming their availability – driven by comprehensive legislation such as the EU’s Digital Services Act, the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and China’s E-Commerce Law.
• Staydown measures remain far more challenging: only 13% of jurisdictions confirmed general implementation, while 59% face substantial enforcement challenges. The EU stands out as a particularly favourable jurisdiction, building on the DSA’s mandatory repeat-offender regime and the CJEU’s forward-looking preventive measures established in L'Oréal v eBay.
• Whitelisting has gained limited traction – only 13% of jurisdictions report feasibility, with most relying on platform-specific policies rather than legal mandates.
• Jurisdiction over non-resident sellers is reported by 81% of jurisdictions, yet practical cross-border enforcement remains resource-intensive.
• Civil remedies are widely available (91%), but criminal enforcement varies considerably and is often impractical against non-resident operators.

The findings are enriched with detailed regional analysis, comparing practices in the US, China and the EU, and are accompanied by a series of world maps highlighting the main points.

Looking ahead

There is reason for cautious optimism. The EU's comprehensive regulatory approach, which combines the DSA’s platform accountability framework with established CJEU and national court jurisprudence, not only provides a model that other jurisdictions could consider adopting, but also creates market incentives for platforms to implement robust anticounterfeiting technologies on a global scale.

Once platforms invest in AI-powered filtering systems and automated detection technologies to comply with EU staydown obligations, there is every reason to expect these tools to be deployed worldwide, raising protection levels even in jurisdictions that lack the legal framework to mandate such measures.

International cooperation, harmonisation of staydown obligations, and the proliferation of platform-level technical solutions will be crucial in closing the enforcement gaps that currently allow counterfeit goods to proliferate across borders.

For more information, please contact Stefan Schröter of the ACPT Team.