Home / Blogs

Brand Abuse and IP Infringements – Part 2: Enforcement and Return on Investment

In the first article in this two-part series, we looked at the impact of brand abuse and infringements against intellectual property (IP) on an organization's brand value. In this second article, we delve into how action against enforceable infringements can deliver tangible return on investment (ROI) for a brand, and demonstrate the importance of a robust brand protection program.

Enforceable infringements and ROI

Providing that a company has sufficient protection of its IP (e.g., trademarks registered in the appropriate product classes and geographic regions), there are typically a range of enforcement options available for the removal of infringing content. The existence of infringements can produce direct financial loss to an organization; their removal allows some or all of this lost or diverted revenue to be reclaimed. This is clearly demonstrated in the following cases:

  • Fraudulent copycat sites, designed to harvest user login credentials and provide access to funds through phishing
  • Fake, branded sites selling counterfeit goods

Taking down these types of infringement also directly benefits a brand's consumer base, protecting customers from fraud, or substandard, non-legitimate goods that may put their safety at risk. For example, counterfeit versions of certain product types — such as electronics, automotive parts, safety equipment, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics — are particularly prone to exposing consumers to danger1. Reported cases include drugs that contain either no active ingredient or incorrect ingredients2, toxic ingredients appearing in cosmetics3 or children's products4, and instances of faulty electrical goods providing a risk of electric shock or fire5.

Even where an infringement is less obviously impactful, its presence online can still result in financial losses for the brand owner. Consider the case of a (cybersquatted) domain whose name contains a trademarked brand name with no significant content other than a parking page. If this domain receives significant amounts of web traffic — through users reaching the site via mistyping the URL or a search engine listing — and this traffic is monetized (e.g., via the inclusion of pay-per-click links), the owner of the fake domain can potentially generate revenue that should legitimately be going to the brand owner. If the brand in question is able to reclaim this domain through an acquisition process, it can also reclaim its web traffic, and a proportion can be converted to generate revenue for the brand owner. The table below demonstrates how this may be quantified in practice.

Table 1: Sample ROI calculation for a reclaimed domain (using example values)
No. of visitors to domain (based on web-traffic estimates)100 visitors a day
(which can be redirected to the official site, after domain acquisition)
Proportion of repeat visitors (aggregated over a year)25%
Total unique visitors to site per year= 100 x (100% - 25%) x 365
27,375 visitors a year
Business conversion rate (proportion of visitors who will make a purchase or become a customer upon landing on the official site)5%
Average customer spend$50
Total reclaimed revenue= (27,375 x 5%) x $50
$68,438

Similar techniques also exist for estimating the ROI associated with removing counterfeit or otherwise non-legitimate items on standalone eCommerce sites or marketplaces, or for estimating the total value of delisted goods. The calculations take account of factors like assumptions regarding the proportion of users who would buy a legitimate item if the counterfeits were unavailable, and the numbers of items available in the individual listings.

The figure below provides a case study showing the numbers of enforcement actions per month for a company in the movie industry focused on piracy of hard goods (i.e., DVDs, Blu-ray, etc.), over the first 24 months of its service with CSC. Note the initial spike of activity, corresponding to the pre-existing landscape of infringements, followed by a rapid decrease to eventual low levels as a successful enforcement program greatly reduced the online availability of infringing items.

Figure 1: Example of number fo enforcement actions per month over a two-year period with CSC

The importance of brand protection

A proactive brand protection program allows an organization to monitor for online infringements relating to its brand, and take remedial action, including the removal of the infringing content. This not only protects the organization from losses to brand value, but also shields its customers from exposure to harmful content and substandard goods.

Enforcement action is a key element of the suite of brand protection services whose teams of experienced analysts offer a number of different methodologies for the takedown of infringing content. Considering activity on eCommerce marketplaces alone, over two million listings have been removed on behalf of our brand-owner customers since the start of 2016; an average of over 38,000 listings per month.

In many cases, the removal of individual infringements directly results in the ability for the brand owner to reclaim sizeable amounts of lost revenue. Analysis of the statistics associated with enforcement action can allow a company to quantify the return on investment associated with its brand protection program and can provide a compelling case for its continuation.

By David Barnett, Brand Monitoring Subject-Matter Expert at CSC – David Barnett has worked in the internet brand-protection industry as an analyst and consultant since 2004. David managed the Analysis & Consultancy services in Brand Monitoring from 2006 to 2019, and currently works as the Brand Monitoring subject-matter expert in CSC's office in Cambridge, U.K., helping to serve a range of brand-protection customers in a variety of industries. Visit Page

CircleID Newsletter The Weekly Wrap

More and more professionals are choosing to publish critical posts on CircleID from all corners of the Internet industry. If you find it hard to keep up daily, consider subscribing to our weekly digest. We will provide you a convenient summary report once a week sent directly to your inbox. It's a quick and easy read.

I make a point of reading CircleID. There is no getting around the utility of knowing what thoughtful people are thinking and saying about our industry.

VINTON CERF
Co-designer of the TCP/IP Protocols & the Architecture of the Internet

Comments

 Be the first to post a comment!

Add Your Comments

 To post your comments, please login or create an account.

Related

Topics

New TLDs

Sponsored byAfilias

Whois

Sponsored byWhoisXML API

IP Addressing

Sponsored byIPv4.Global

Brand Protection

Sponsored byAppdetex

DNS Security

Sponsored byAfilias

Domain Names

Sponsored byVerisign

Cybersecurity

Sponsored byVerisign

Cybercrime

Sponsored byThreat Intelligence Platform