A recent joint study published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) estimated the global impact of illicit trade at an extraordinary US$467 billion annually. Beyond the impressive financial figure, the most critical development for legal departments and intellectual property rights holders lies in the profound transformation of counterfeiting logistics: the accelerated shift from large, consolidated consignments transported in maritime containers to express consignments and fragmented postal parcels.
According to the study, the systematic fragmentation of shipments and the diversification of routes across multiple geographical hubs are deliberately designed to mitigate customs risk. By dividing large inventories into countless micro-shipments facilitated by cross-border e-commerce, illicit networks take advantage of the physical impossibility of conducting exhaustive inspections of postal traffic through sampling-based customs controls.
At the same time, within the South American regional context, organized criminal groups have directly appropriated these logistical routes. Attracted by profit margins that may easily exceed 300% to 500%, and benefiting from a sanctioning framework that has historically treated trademark infringement less severely than drug trafficking, criminal organizations have begun coordinating the distribution of industrial inputs, electronics, apparel and medicines through increasingly sophisticated corporate-style structures.
This convergence of logistical and criminal vectors requires brand owners to move away from reactive approaches and urgently recalibrate their brand protection strategies, prioritizing measures with greater strategic depth:
From reactive physical detention to predictive risk intelligence:
The passive expectation that customs authorities will identify illicit shipments through generic parameters has become outdated in the face of postal volumes reaching millions of parcels. Effective portfolio protection requires structured agreements and continuous channels of communication with the Brazilian Federal Revenue Service and law enforcement agencies. This includes the timely provision of risk matrices, identification of recurrent exporters and importers, monitoring of shipments following atypical routes and advance tracking of digital catalogs that feed these flows even before the goods reach Brazilian territory.
Civil liability and enforceable duties of care applicable to logistical nodes:
The capillarity of fragmented distribution depends heavily on sorting centers, fulfillment facilities, freight forwarders and express carriers. Under Brazilian law, particularly in light of Articles 186 and 927 of the Civil Code, combined with Articles 189 and 190 of the Industrial Property Law (Law No. 9,279/1996), formal notice and the imposition of objective duties of care should extend to these intermediaries. Transportation and logistics companies cannot operate as blind channels: once they become aware of recurrent conduct by certain shippers or the absence of reliable documentation, they should be held accountable for damages resulting from the facilitation of illicit trade.
The fragmentation of consignments therefore changes not only the logistics of the illicit activity, but also the very process of identifying counterfeiting. A product may enter the country without, in isolation, displaying all the elements that characterize trademark infringement, while labels, packaging, seals or other distinctive components arrive through separate channels. A combined analysis of these elements and their intended economic purpose becomes essential to effective enforcement.
At this point, the cooperation of the rights holder becomes particularly relevant. Information concerning authenticating features, packaging patterns, legitimate product versions and recurring counterfeiting techniques may enable authorities to identify, at the customs stage itself, combinations of components that would not appear suspicious when examined separately. Trademark protection may therefore also function as an intelligence tool for customs enforcement.
Ongoing technical training to address the fragmentation of neutral inputs:
To circumvent customs controls, infringers have increasingly resorted to disguised imports of components lacking visible trademarks, while logos, labels and premium packaging or technology are shipped separately for subsequent assembly and finishing locally. In response to this sophistication, rights holders should focus on continuous training for frontline customs officials and on providing detailed forensic and identification guides. Such technical cooperation is essential to enabling authorities to identify material indicators supporting the detention of apparently lawful inputs intended for the assembly of counterfeit goods.
The mitigation of illicit trade in products protected by intellectual property can no longer be addressed solely at the border through isolated government action. For companies operating in Brazil, contemporary enforcement requires dedicated investments in data intelligence, continuous coordination with tax and customs authorities, and an inseparable integration between the fight against digital sales channels and customs enforcement.
