Topic starter
11/11/2026 6:01 pm
TL;DR: Counterfeit enforcement starts with online clues and follows payment, shipping and registry evidence to identify the operators behind multiple storefronts, according to Corsearch. Brands that stop at listings will miss the wider network that makes repeat infringement possible.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Corsearch: “The Anatomy of a Raid: What Happens Before Authorities Knock Down the Door?”.
Key questions
Q: Why do shell companies make counterfeit enforcement harder?
A: Shell companies make counterfeit enforcement harder because they separate visible storefronts from the beneficial owner, distributor, or logistics operator.
Q: How should teams use test purchases in brand protection investigations?
A: Teams use test purchases to confirm whether a listing is counterfeit, capture packaging and product evidence, and identify fulfilment, payment, and shipping details.
Q: How do investigators link counterfeit listings to the real operators?
A: Investigators link counterfeit listings to real operators by correlating marketplace accounts, payment rails, shipping addresses, device fingerprints, IP logs, reuse of images or product descriptions, and parcel or warehouse records.
Practitioner guidance
- Map the full network, not the individual listing Correlate storefronts, shipping artefacts, payment references and domain registrations to identify shared control across channels.
- Use test purchases as evidence work Design test purchases to elicit return addresses, fulfilment locations and payment intermediaries, then preserve the full chain of communication.
- Validate corporate entities against ownership records Check incorporation documents, directors, residential addresses and beneficial ownership for shell patterns that connect seemingly separate businesses.
Bottom line: Counterfeit operations are organised networks, so enforcement fails when teams stop at the visible listing or storefront.
Glossary terms: Counterfeit Network, Test Purchase, Beneficial Ownership, Shell Company
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
11/11/2026 6:07 pm
Counterfeit enforcement is an attribution problem before it is a seizure problem. The visible listing is rarely the real target because the operator can replace it quickly. What changes enforcement outcomes is whether investigators can connect the listing to the payments, shipping routes, corporate records and physical inventory that prove control. That means the discipline is closer to trust and identity correlation than simple product removal.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What evidence do authorities need before acting on counterfeit goods?
A: Authorities usually need evidence that a specific seller or supply chain is tied to infringing goods, plus enough detail to support seizure, takedown, or prosecution. Useful evidence includes samples, photographs, purchase records, shipping data, payment traces, and preservation of the chain of custody from collection to analysis.
👉 Read our full editorial: Mapping counterfeit listings reveals the network behind enforcement