Customs key to big-fish counterfeiters: 3M counsel

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Customs key to big-fish counterfeiters: 3M counsel

Sponsored by

incopro.png
sebastian-pena-lambarri-abj-zuko6mg-unsplash.jpg

Hosted by Managing IP’s Ed Conlon, the discussion at Incopro’s Insync Virtual Summit explored how the pandemic has affected brand protection teams and offered key insights to drive success in 2021

The chief trademark counsel at 3M told an industry conference last month that brand owners must work closely with customs officials to reel in big-fish counterfeiters.

Colette Durst was speaking on a panel at Incopro’s Insync Virtual Summit on Thursday, January 28, alongside Jennifer Ehrlich, a strategic communications leader at 3M.

Durst, whom Managing IP also interviewed in late January, told the conference that brands should be prepared to do more with less in 2021 as budgets remain tight.

It came as a poll during the panel showed that nearly 50% of respondents have a smaller budget than at this time last year, while 34% said theirs had not changed. A further 19% said their budget has actually increased.

Durst and Ehrlich were reliving events from a year in which 3M’s workload has increased hugely. The company, which specialises in worker safety and healthcare, was put on the COVID frontline in early 2020 as demand for its N95 respirators soared.

At the same time, 3M witnessed a surge in trademark infringement, counterfeiting and fraud, particularly online. It responded by taking legal action and boosting communicating efforts, with 3M’s related in-house teams joining forces.

The IP team has also worked with law enforcement to stamp out counterfeiters, and Durst praised officials as “incredibly collaborative”. She said 3M will continue its work with the authorities, especially on large-sized cases.

3M has also used online and customs enforcement to make it harder for counterfeiters to get counterfeit respirators delivered to consumers. 

For the “big fish”, as she put it, Durst recommended using customs to block goods from entering a country and using the shipment data to track down the offenders. “That has been incredibly helpful,” she said.

Durst added that 3M is continuing to look at how else it can identify the big fish, including by using technology tools, even as the IP team does more with less in 2021.

For further examples of 3M’s communication efforts, please see: www.3m.com/covidfraud

To learn more about the panel, which was hosted by Managing IP’s managing editor Ed Conlon, please see the recording on the Insync website.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Leaders at US law firms explain what attorneys can learn from AI cases involving Meta and Anthropic, and why the outcomes could guide litigation strategies
Attorneys reveal the trademark and copyright trends they’ve noticed within the first half of 2025
Senior leaders at TE Connectivity and Clarivate explain how they see the future of innovation
A new action filed by Nokia against Asus and a landmark ruling on counterfeits by South Africa’s Supreme Court were also among the top talking points
Counsel explain how they’re navigating patent prosecution matters and highlight key takeaways from Federal Circuit cases
A partner who joined Fenwick alongside two others explains what drew her to the firm and her hopes for growth in Boston
The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Chris Moore at HGF reflects on the ‘spirit of collegiality’ that led to an important ruling in G1/24, a case concerning how European patent claims should be interpreted
Gift this article