Please wait while the page is loading...

loader

ASEAN IP: Ecommerce and IP enforcement challenges

16 February 2025

ASEAN IP: Ecommerce and IP enforcement challenges

Kar Liang Soh addresses panellists on day two of the ASEAN IPA

Delegates listening to the Ecommerce and IP Enforcement session

The high costs and comparatively low rewards of acting against infringers often leads intellectual property owners to simply forego enforcement actions, particularly against small importers, attendees at the ASEAN IPA annual general meeting and conference in Siam Reap heard.

“There is a difficulty in enforcing infringement against infringing items that flow in as small quantities,” said Kar Liang Soh, managing director of Ella Cheong in Singapore. Soh was moderating a panel at the conference.

One of the challenges is striking a balance between the costs of action and the outcome, explained panellist Eddie Wu, counsellor at Lee and Li in Taipei. Costs can range from US$3,000 to over US$200,000, depending on the complexity of the case, so IP owners are often less willing to take action against small importers. Using Taiwan Customs as an example, he explained that 99 percent of infringing cases involve trademark infringement, and that although items arriving by post make up 88 percent of customs actions, they only account for 36 percent of the total number of items seized. The small volume problem is increasing in Taiwan, he said.

Asked by Soh if there was a solution, Wu explained that if trademark owners can educate customs on how to spot fakes, they will take action, even in small quantity imports. “Self-help works,” agreed Soh.

Platform models

Many products will flow through platforms said Soh. Turning to Daniel Dougherty, senior director for global IP enforcement at Alibaba International, he asked what observations he could share with IP owners.

“We do have initiatives where we work with customs officials to help them. In some cases, the logistics company will provide a URL associated with the small package, and for seized items we try and match that information back to the seller so we can take action,” Dougherty explained. “As an ecommerce platform, we don’t always have the information linked to the logistics company. There is usually a logistics company between the buyer and seller. If I’m a seller, my factory may be located elsewhere, so the address of the seller does not match the address of the shipment.”

Soh suggested that it sounds like the problems faced by platforms may be dependent on their business models. David Haskel, a partner with Abacus IP in Phnom Penh, agreed. Haskel explained that there is a low shipping cost for small items, which allows businesses to ship easily, but that import duties are generally not paid on small items. Highlighting two scenarios, Haskel explained that a seller may import en masse and pay duty, then sell to individuals, but for small package deliveries, the items may be shipped directly from the factory to the consumer, cutting out the middle man.

Tomoya Kurokawa highlights customs enforcement in Japan

Change is in the works

Highlighting changes in Japan, Tomoya Kurokawa, vice president of Soei Patent & Law Firm in Tokyo, explained that prior to October 2022, if an importer had claimed goods were being shipped in for private use, it was difficult for Japan Customs to seize them. This changed on October 1 when the bringing of counterfeit goods by overseas vendors into Japan commercially via postal mail and small parcels was specified as an infringement, even for private use.

Kurokawa went on to discuss internet shopping mall owners, explaining that a 2012 case established that an online reseller was guilty of infringement if they operate a system that manages and controls the services to store owners, they receive a benefit from store owners, they become aware of an infringing mark and they fail to take action. The platform owner can avoid infringing the mark by removing the infringing items from their site within a reasonable time after they are made aware of it.

Haskel explained that with imports into the U.S., goods valued at less than US$800 were previously exempt from customs duty – the so-called de minimis exemption – but now that the Trump administration has abolished the exemption, one of the challenges of small parcel shipments may have been solved, at least temporarily.

Sometimes platforms need to deal with managing the expectations of IP owners and sellers, Soh said. “IP owners often don’t have the ability to identify the merchant. How can IP owners identify them?”

In Japan, explained Kurokawa, platforms have an obligation to IP owners. Once the platform is informed about the infringing items, they are normally very collaborative, he said. But a platform can avoid this by taking action and removing the infringing content within a reasonable period of time.

“We really do try to make it a collaborative process,” agreed Alibaba’s Dougherty, explaining there is a good amount of cooperation with IP owners, and there are online tools where IP owners can connect with the platform and report infringing products.

“And if that doesn’t work, IP owners can always file a criminal lawsuit and force the platform to disclose the seller,” said Haskel.

Soh, Dougherty, Kurokawa and Haskel were speaking on day two of the ASEAN IPA annual general meeting and conference, which was held on February 14-15, 2025, in Siem Reap.

- Darren Barton, reporting from Siem Reap


Law firms