Scenario: Fashion brand “NANG” finds a marketplace stall selling knockoff bags under its mark with over 10,000 orders, estimated VND 8 billion revenue, thousands of 5-star reviews from fooled buyers. This is no small stall – the scale supports criminal prosecution. The roadmap?
1. Fix evidence: the 10,000 figure is gold
At this scale, sales evidence drives damages and sentencing frames. (a) Commission a notarial record (vi bang) capturing the stall: shop name, knockoff listings, order counts, prices, reviews – capture everything, since figures may be hidden post-complaint; (b) mystery-shop repeatedly (various models) for samples + receipts; (c) request the platform’s transaction data for the shop (via proceedings or platform cooperation); (d) forensic examination concluding the samples are trademark counterfeits. 10,000 orders x unit price = the damages basis in the civil suit and frame-setting fact in the criminal case.
2. Emergency takedown + criminal reporting
(a) Emergency takedown complaint via the platform’s brand-protection channel (notarial record + trademark certificate) – at 10,000 orders, platforms usually prioritise. (b) Criminal reporting to the police: VND 8 billion revenue bears the signs of producing/trading counterfeit goods (Article 192 Penal Code) and IP infringement (Article 226) in high sentencing frames. Investigators can trace money flows (shop receiving accounts) and trace supply (the factory) – uprooting the whole ring, not just one stall.
3. Civil lawsuit: full damages
In parallel, sue civilly for: (a) material damages (diverted revenue – estimated from 10,000 orders; handling, examination, counsel costs); (b) reputational/moral damages (per regulations); (c) injunctions – cessation, full delisting, public apology. Note: identify the real party behind the stall (individual/organisation, via platform and investigators) – suing an unidentified “virtual shop” stalls.
Frequently asked questions
Can a 10,000-order counterfeit shop face criminal prosecution?
Possibly – estimated VND 8 billion revenue bears the signs of producing/trading counterfeit goods (Article 192) and IP infringement (Article 226) in high frames. Report to the police with the notarial order-count record and examined samples.
What is the most important evidence?
The notarial record of order counts, prices, reviews (captured before the shop hides figures); mystery-shopped samples plus counterfeit examination conclusions; the shop’s transaction data (via platform or authorities).
What damages are reasonable to claim?
Basis: estimated revenue from orders (10,000 x unit price), handling/examination/counsel costs, reputational loss. Courts decide the final amount on evidence – the better proven the figures, the higher the award.
This article is pending review by the QA Council before publication.
This article has been quality-reviewed by the FLAW AI Legal Council