Publication
Takeaways from the USPTO’s Anti-Counterfeiting Webinar for Trademark Owners
Executive Summary
On September 23, 2026, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) hosted a USPTO Hour webinar titled “Trademarks and Anti-Counterfeiting,” featuring Ameen Imam, Attorney Advisor in the USPTO’s Office of Policy and International Affairs, and Jason Lott, Managing Attorney for Trademarks Customer Outreach. The webinar addressed the growing threat that counterfeit products pose to businesses and consumers, the role federal trademark registration plays in anti-counterfeiting enforcement, and tools available to brand owners, including U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) recordation and emerging legislative requirements such as the INFORM Consumers Act.
This Legal Alert summarizes the webinar’s key takeaways and offers practical guidance for business owners, entrepreneurs, and in-house counsel seeking to strengthen their brand-protection strategies.
Intellectual Property Basics: Why Trademarks Matter
The webinar opened with a reminder that intellectual property is a core business asset, not an abstract legal concept. According to the presenters, intangible assets such as patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets account for approximately 92% of the total market value of S&P 500 companies. IP-intensive industries accounted for 44% of U.S. GDP in 2024, or roughly $11.4 trillion, and employ nearly 50 million Americans, or about one-third of the U.S. workforce, with additional indirect employment of approximately 11%.
Trademarks in particular serve as a signal of authenticity. Consumers rely on trademarks to identify the source and quality of goods and services. When counterfeiters exploit that trust, the harm extends beyond the brand owner’s lost revenue to the consumer’s health, safety, and confidence in the marketplace.
Federal Registration vs. Common-Law Rights
A common misconception is that a business “gets” a trademark by filing an application with the USPTO. As the webinar clarified, federal registration is not the way a business obtains a trademark in the first instance. Instead, trademark rights in the United States arise from actual use of a mark in commerce. A business applies to federally register a trademark it already uses or has a bona fide intent to use in connection with specific goods or services.
That said, federal registration on the USPTO’s Principal Register confers several advantages:
- Legal presumptions: Registration is prima facie evidence of the validity of the mark, the registrant’s ownership, and the exclusive right to use the mark in commerce for the registered goods or services. See 15 U.S.C. § 1115.
- Constructive notice: Registration provides nationwide constructive notice of the registrant’s claim of ownership. See 15 U.S.C. § 1072.
- Federal court jurisdiction: Registration enables the owner to bring suit in federal court, including actions for injunctive relief and, in certain counterfeiting cases, ex parte seizure orders. See 15 U.S.C. § 1116.
- International filing support: A U.S. registration can serve as a basis for trademark filings in other countries.
- The ® symbol: Only federally registered marks may use the ® symbol, which signals to consumers and competitors that the mark is protected.
- CBP recordation: Registration allows the owner to record its mark with CBP, an important enforcement tool discussed below.
The USPTO emphasized that the details in a trademark application matter for examination and because CBP officers may later rely on the registration’s description of the mark and goods when evaluating imports at the border.
Counterfeiting: Scope, Definitions, and Real-World Harm
Legal Definition
The webinar carefully distinguished counterfeiting from other forms of imitation. Under federal law and CBP regulations, a counterfeit mark is a “spurious mark” that is “identical with, or substantially indistinguishable from,” a mark registered on the USPTO’s Principal Register. See 19 C.F.R. § 133.21. Ameen Imam noted that online terminology such as “knockoffs,” “replicas,” “reps,” “mirror quality,” “inspired,” and “dupes” can be misleading: a product that mimics the look and feel or design of another product does not necessarily bear a counterfeit mark. The legal inquiry centers on whether the mark itself is spurious and substantially indistinguishable from the registered mark.
The Scale of the Problem
Counterfeiting is widespread. According to the webinar, the OECD estimated the value of counterfeit products at $467 billion in 2022, up from $464 billion in 2019 and $200 billion in 2005. Mainland China accounted for 45% of reported CBP seizures, with Hong Kong accounting for an additional 27%. Counterfeit supply chains are geographically dispersed, and enforcement pressure points include free trade zones and small-parcel de minimis shipping.
The webinar noted that after the United States suspended the de minimis exception for shipments from China and Hong Kong in May 2025, CBP seizures dropped from approximately 3 million in 2024 to 1.5 million in 2025. The figures suggest that the de minimis loophole had been a significant conduit for counterfeit goods.
Health and Safety Consequences
Counterfeit products can pose serious health and safety risks in many product categories:
- Toys: Counterfeit toys can bypass more than 100 federal safety standards and third-party testing requirements.
- Cosmetics: Counterfeit cosmetics may involve bacterial contamination, toxic or hazardous ingredients, heavy metals, or the absence of an active ingredient.
- Agricultural pesticides: Counterfeit pesticides can harm downstream consumers who may never know that produce was exposed to an unapproved chemical.
- Automotive parts: Counterfeit auto parts, including airbags, brake pads, wheels, and sensors, pose direct risks to vehicle safety.
- Pharmaceuticals: Counterfeit medicines may contain no active ingredient, insufficient active ingredient, or dangerous additives such as fentanyl. The webinar referenced counterfeit GLP-1 and Ozempic-style products and noted that visual differences between genuine and counterfeit pharmaceutical packaging may be as subtle as the placement of lot and expiration information. According to the presenters, counterfeit pharmaceutical incidents rose approximately 50% globally between 2018 and 2022.
Enforcement Without a Lawsuit
The webinar also addressed enforcement mechanisms that do not require filing a lawsuit. For many small and mid-sized businesses, federal litigation is prohibitively expensive. The following tools can supplement or, in some cases, replace courtroom enforcement.
Marketplace-Specific Takedown Programs
Third-party sellers can use the infrastructure of major e-commerce platforms, including payment processing, fulfillment centers, warehousing, delivery, and advertising, to sell counterfeit goods at scale. Seller anonymity, foreign locations, multiple aliases, shared product pages, and inconsistent takedown procedures across platforms make enforcement difficult.
Most major online marketplaces maintain brand-protection or IP-infringement reporting programs. Amazon’s Brand Registry, eBay’s Verified Rights Owner Program (VeRO), and similar programs on other platforms allow trademark owners to report infringing listings and request removal. Federal trademark registration is typically required or strongly preferred to participate in these programs. Brand owners should register for each marketplace on which their products are sold and monitor for infringing listings regularly.
UDRP and Domain-Name Disputes
When counterfeiters register domain names that incorporate a brand owner’s trademark to operate counterfeit websites, the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) offers an administrative remedy. UDRP proceedings are typically faster and less expensive than federal court litigation and can result in the transfer or cancellation of an infringing domain name. A federal trademark registration strengthens a UDRP complaint because it provides strong evidence of rights in the mark.
Copyright Strikes and Content Takedowns
The webinar highlighted the role of social media in counterfeiting. Tactics described by the presenters include direct sales via social-media platforms, “dupe influencers,” targeted advertising, disappearing stories, off-platform redirects, hidden links, and counterfeit websites designed to mimic legitimate brands. In one case discussed, the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations and the Department of Justice charged a TikTok user with illegally selling unapproved, misbranded weight-loss drugs, including Ozempic sourced from Central and South America. One victim developed a life-threatening infection.
Where counterfeiters use copyrighted images, product photography, or marketing materials, brand owners may file copyright takedown notices under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). While DMCA takedowns address the infringing content rather than the counterfeit product, they can disrupt social-media and website-based counterfeiting operations.
CBP Recordation
The webinar emphasized the value of recording a federal trademark registration with U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Under 19 C.F.R. § 133.1, a trademark registered on the USPTO’s Principal Register may be recorded with CBP. The recordation fee is $190 per international class, and the recordation term runs concurrently with the underlying USPTO registration.
Once recorded, CBP has authority to identify, target, detain, seize, forfeit, and ultimately destroy imported merchandise bearing a counterfeit mark. The process works as follows:
- CBP may detain imported articles suspected of bearing a counterfeit mark for up to 30 days.
- CBP notifies the importer within five business days of the detention.
- The importer has a seven-business-day response period before CBP may disclose certain information to the recorded mark owner.
- CBP may share identifying information, images, photographs, or samples with the recorded mark owner to help determine authenticity.
- If CBP determines that the merchandise bears a counterfeit mark, the goods are seized and, absent written consent from the recorded mark owner, forfeited under customs laws.
The webinar recommended several steps to make CBP recordation more effective: submit a Product Identification Guide to help CBP officers distinguish genuine products from counterfeits; respond promptly to CBP inquiries; stay informed about pre-seizure disclosure procedures; report suspected infringing importers through CBP’s e-Allegations portal; and, where possible, conduct product-identification training for CBP personnel.
New Legislation: The INFORM Consumers Act
The webinar addressed the INFORM Consumers Act (15 U.S.C. § 45f), which imposes new obligations on online marketplaces to increase seller transparency. The Act requires online marketplaces to collect, verify, and disclose information for “high-volume third-party sellers,” which the Act defines as sellers with at least 200 discrete sales or transactions of new or unused consumer products and at least $5,000 in gross revenues in a continuous 12-month period during the prior 24 months.
Key requirements of the INFORM Consumers Act include:
- Collecting and verifying identifying and contact information for high-volume sellers.
- Conspicuously disclosing seller information in product listings for sellers with $20,000 or more in annual gross revenues on the marketplace.
- Providing clear and conspicuous electronic and telephonic reporting mechanisms for consumers and brand owners to report suspicious marketplace activity.
- Violations are treated as unfair or deceptive practices under the FTC Act, enforceable by both the FTC and state attorneys general.
The webinar cited a 2025 enforcement action against a major online marketplace, in which the FTC and DOJ alleged failures to maintain adequate telephonic reporting mechanisms, properly report suspicious marketplace activity, and conspicuously disclose seller information in product listings. According to the webinar, the marketplace agreed to pay a $2 million civil penalty and accept injunctive relief. The case shows that federal regulators are enforcing the INFORM Act and that online marketplaces can face consequences for noncompliance.
Practical Guidance for Brand Owners
Business owners, entrepreneurs, and in-house counsel should consider the following steps to protect their brands and their customers:
- Register your trademarks federally. If your business uses a trademark in commerce and has not applied for federal registration, consider doing so. Federal registration is a prerequisite for CBP recordation, strengthens marketplace takedown requests, and creates legal presumptions that can simplify enforcement.
- Get the trademark application right. Because many enforcement mechanisms rely on the details of your registration, work with experienced trademark counsel to ensure that the mark description, identification of goods and services, and specimens of use are accurate and complete.
- Record your registrations. Recordation of your registration with the relevant enforcement body is a free or relatively low-cost step ($190 per class for CBP) that can improve border enforcement against counterfeits.
- Monitor online marketplaces and social media. Regularly search for infringing listings and social-media accounts and participate in platform-specific brand-protection programs.
- Use the INFORM Consumers Act. Report suspicious sellers through marketplace reporting mechanisms and document noncompliance for potential escalation to the FTC or state attorneys general.
- Use UDRP and DMCA tools. Address domain-name and content-based counterfeiting through administrative remedies that often move faster and cost less than litigation.
- Document everything. Maintain records of counterfeiting activity, takedown requests, CBP referrals, and enforcement outcomes. A well-documented enforcement history strengthens any future litigation or regulatory complaint.
Conclusion
The USPTO’s September 2026 webinar on trademarks and anti-counterfeiting made a straightforward point: in a marketplace affected by sophisticated counterfeiting, AI-generated deception, and global supply-chain complexity, authenticity is a form of brand protection. Federal trademark registration, CBP recordation, marketplace enforcement programs, and legislation such as the INFORM Consumers Act give brand owners several tools to combat counterfeiting without necessarily resorting to litigation.
For businesses of all sizes, proactive trademark protection is more than a legal formality. It protects revenue, reputation, and consumer trust.
About Snell & Wilmer
Founded in 1938, Snell & Wilmer is a full-service business law firm with more than 500 attorneys practicing in 17 locations throughout the United States and in Mexico, including Phoenix and Tucson, Arizona; Los Angeles, Orange County, Palo Alto and San Diego, California; Denver, Colorado; Washington, D.C.; Boise, Idaho; Las Vegas and Reno-Tahoe, Nevada; Albuquerque, New Mexico; Portland, Oregon; Dallas, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; Seattle, Washington; and Los Cabos, Mexico. The firm represents clients ranging from large, publicly traded corporations to small businesses, individuals and entrepreneurs. For more information, visit swlaw.com.
