Brazil: Beyond traditional IP infringements in the online environment

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

Brazil: Beyond traditional IP infringements in the online environment

Sponsored by

daniel-400px.png
the-creative-exchange-svrei2myiv4-unsplash.jpg

André Oliveira of Daniel Law considers how IP infringement and brand protection has evolved in Brazil amid the pandemic

It has been widely reported that the COVID-19 pandemic has strongly fostered e-commerce. In Brazil alone, e-commerce sales have increased over 68% in 2020 when compared to 2019, according to the Brazilian E-commerce Association (ABComm). This trend has also led to an expansion on online IP infringements such as illegal streaming, set-top boxes providing unauthorised access to pay-per-view television channels and the sale of counterfeit products on social media and marketplaces.

Other than the online expansion of existing infringements, IP owners are facing an unprecedented escalation in the number of new online frauds. One example of an inherently online IP infringement is the unauthorised use of third parties’ marks and trade dress in application names for mobile phones.

The unauthorised use of trademarks in application names seems at first easy to tackle. A search on the app stores from the two major operating systems would be enough to unveil the infringement and enable take-down requests. However, infringers will often avoid the main operating systems and will use different platforms which have less stringent compliance rules.

Moreover, there have been infringements that go beyond trademark use in the application name and are serious enough to undermine brand reputation. For instance, the Daniel Law team came across financial scam apps which claimed to have a partnership with a giant tech company. The claims were evidently false but were amplified through influencer marketing and helped mislead consumers.

The same financial scam used an application name which was a registered trademark owned by an international company from a completely unrelated industry. As a result, the company started to receive messages from misled consumers asking if this unrelated company had a connection with the infringer.

Finally, the Daniel Law team have witnessed an expansion in the unauthorised use of trademarks in delivery services which have also become extremely popular in the time of the pandemic. As an example, a Brazilian delivery app had its trademark and trade dress reproduced or imitated by over 170 third parties in different local jurisdictions.

In this challenging scenario, IP owners should diversify enforcement efforts through real-time online investigation and monitoring combined with immediate take-down action and further traditional legal measures when necessary.

 

André OliveiraPartner, Daniel LawE: andre.oliveira@daniel-ip.com 

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