The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and the European Commission released a report today titled “EU Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights” on results at the EU border and in the EU internal market in 2025. The report explained that “over 196 million counterfeit articles were detained at the EU border and in the EU internal market, with an estimated retail value of EUR 6.3 billion.” Detention volume rose over 67% from 2024, and the estimated value surpassed 2024 by almost 63%, which the report identifies as the “second consecutive all-time record” for value.
Many intellectual property rights peacefully coexist because they apply to distinct aspects of a product. Issues can arise when intellectual property rights that expire and intellectual property rights that do not expire protect the same or overlapping features of the same product. One example is design patents and trade dress rights, both of which apply to non-functional ornamental features.
Brazil is ranked as the world’s third-largest beauty and personal care consumer market, according to Euromonitor data compiled by ABIHPEC (Brazilian Association of the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Industry. Even in a socially and economically diverse country such as Brazil, self-care is a priority. Beauty products are present in nearly 100% of Brazilian households and account for almost 6% of the global market. Brazilians are also open to trying new products and brands. In this context, Asian beauty brands are already gaining a significant foothold in the country…. However, successfully entering the Brazilian market involves more than making products available to local consumers. It also requires protecting the IP assets that underpin the brand.
A brand protection program can remove thousands of infringing listings and still leave the business behind them largely intact. Sellers return under different accounts, storefronts multiply, and counterfeit goods continue reaching customers. AI compounds the problem: the same technology that helps rights holders detect infringement can help counterfeiters generate replacement listings and create new accounts more quickly. Such is the neverending game of whack-a-mole confronting brands.
The American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA) submitted comments to the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) on October 7, recommending that USTR include Facebook, Instagram, Alibaba.com, AliExpress, and DHgate in its 2026 Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy (NML) report. While Alibaba and DHgate platforms have been included on the list before, Facebook and Instagram have “avoided accountability” so far, according to the letter.
A defendant facing an action for infringement of an EU trademark may challenge the validity of that trademark by filing a counterclaim before the EU trademark court. But what happens if the defendant does not do so? Is the opportunity to challenge the trademark’s validity lost, or may the defendant later seek a declaration of invalidity from the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)?
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John Squires faced the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Intellectual Property Tuesday in an oversight hearing pushing for more information on several of the policy changes his administration has put in place. The hearing was the last over which its current Chairman, Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC), will preside.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is considering whether to impose new requirements on social-media companies, search engines and other online platforms whose advertising systems help impersonation scams reach consumers. In a September 24 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM), the FTC requested information about platforms’ ad-optimization tools, financial incentives and efforts to prevent fraudulent advertisers from impersonating government agencies and legitimate businesses.
African tech funding just had its strongest year since the 2022 peak…. That discipline shows up nowhere more clearly than in due diligence, and increasingly, that due diligence includes a hard look at intellectual property. For African founders raising from U.S. investors, and for U.S. funds evaluating African deals, understanding what actually gets scrutinized is no longer optional. It can determine whether a term sheet survives diligence intact, gets repriced, or falls apart entirely.
A Lanham Act false advertising verdict is not a scientific meta-analysis. It does not pool evidence, weight studies by quality, or resolve heterogeneity. It allocates burdens and asks whether the party carrying one carried it on the record that party chose to build. Read a false advertising judgment for more than that — for what the science shows, for whether the product works — and you will misread it.
Online counterfeiting has become ubiquitous. A seller located anywhere in the world can create a digital storefront, copy a brand owner’s photographs and product descriptions, adopt a business name that reveals nothing, and begin selling into the United States before the brand owner even knows the account exists. If the seller is discovered and enforcement begins, the listing disappears, the money moves out of the country and beyond the practical reach of the court system, and a new account surfaces under a different name. Then the entire process repeats.
Every year, U.S. companies expanding into Africa make the same planning mistake: they treat the continent as though it has one intellectual property system. It has two, and choosing the wrong one, or failing to choose at all, can leave a brand or invention unprotected across dozens of countries a company assumed it had already covered. Africa is the only continent with two regional IP registration systems operating side by side. Understanding the difference between them is not a technical footnote. It is one of the first strategic decisions a U.S. company should make before it files anything.
On September 1, a federal judge in the Northern District of Ohio J.M. Smucker Co.‘s trademark and trade dress claims over its crustless, crimped-edge peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. The ruling allows that was filed last October against Trader Joe’s private-label “Crustless Peanut Butter & Strawberry Jam Sandwiches” to proceed to discovery and, potentially, a merits determination on whether a sealed, circular sandwich shape can function as a protectable trademark.
Brazil is one of the world’s largest economies and one of the most important markets for companies seeking expansion in Latin America. However, many foreign applicants quickly discover that success before the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (the Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial – INPI) requires more than simply filing an application. The Brazilian system combines procedural formalities, relatively long examination timelines, unique legal requirements, and several acceleration opportunities that are often overlooked by foreign applicants. Understanding these practical aspects can help businesses avoid unnecessary delays, reduce costs, and build stronger intellectual property portfolios.
U.S. companies planning to enter Nigeria typically build a careful playbook for market research, distribution, hiring, and regulatory compliance. Intellectual property is often the item furthest down that list, treated as paperwork to handle once commercial activity is already underway. That sequencing is backwards, and it is worth understanding why.