CIB services offer way forward in preventing counterfeiting

The need for specialist intelligence gathering, investigation and training to tackle counterfeiting is becoming more evident as the crime shows no sign of abating.

The need for specialist intelligence gathering, investigation and training to tackle counterfeiting is becoming more evident as the crime shows no sign of abating.

Authorities and industry players are calling for greater prevention and enforcement, and this underscores how services such as those provided by ICC’s Counterfeiting Intelligence Bureau (CIB) are a way forward in clamping down on counterfeit markets.

The US Trade Representative’s (USTR) ‘2014 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets' published earlier this month seems to confirm this. It notes it is increasingly evident that in a global environment, enforcement against unscrupulous retailers alone was not enough to reduce the flow of fake goods.

“The importance of effective border controls to prevent exportation of counterfeit goods from their countries of manufacture, to prevent importation into the destination country, and to prevent such goods from transiting third countries on their way to the destination countries cannot be overstated,” USTR said.

With formal links to the World Customs Organisation and Interpol, CIB is primed to provide practical prevention and enforcement support to national customs’ authorities.

CIB does this by gathering intelligence, carrying out covert investigations and providing expert advice and training. It has carried out over 600 investigations in more than 35 countries into counterfeit products ranging from luxury jewellery and furniture to alcoholic beverages and pharmaceuticals.

The USTR list makes it clear that physical markets remain the primary distribution channels for pirated and counterfeit goods and services in much of the world, despite the boom in sales of counterfeit products online.

Nominations and comments gathered by USTR to produce Notorious Markets List identified China as the primary source of counterfeit products.

“Worldwide from the Americas, to Africa, to Eastern Europe, and in Southeast Asia, Chinese-origin counterfeit goods find the way into markets, businesses and homes,” the Review said. It added, “In some cases, parties with ties to China manage the wholesale and retail distribution channels that facilitate the flow of counterfeit merchandise, including to markets such as Prado, Italy; Lagos, Nigeria; Ciudad del Este, Paraguay; and Bangkok, Thailand.”

The List identifies at least five Chinese markets, in Guangzhou, Shanghai, Beijing and Zengcheng as major contributors to counterfeiting.

It said some of these markets are well-known, and as reports suggest, offer an extensive catalogue of products, with some even arranging for on-demand manufacturing and worldwide shipping of the fake goods.

“Some markets have adopted policies and procedures intended to address the availability of counterfeit merchandise, but these are not vigorously enforced by the markets,” USTR said. Nevertheless it added that in many cases Chinese authorities did engage in routine enforcement actions in physical markets.

Other physical markets on the list include those in countries from Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Paraguay, Thailand and Uruguay.

When it comes to online markets, the Review reflects nominations of sites that reportedly engage in copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting as well as domain name registrars (DNRs) that reportedly facilitate the distribution of pirated and counterfeit products, including medicines.

USTR puts the spotlight on DNRs that reportedly play a role in supporting counterfeiting and piracy online instead of adhering to the agreement between DNRs and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers to take action against offending websites. (More of this will be examined in the April issue of Counterfeiting Confidential, a bulletin available exclusively to CIB members)

At the end of the day, USTR says that owners and operators identified in the List had many options for addressing piracy and counterfeiting themselves, but in the absence of such good faith measures is calling on government authorities to investigate and pursue appropriate action against such markets and individuals.

More details about CIB’s investigations and services can be found here.