Piracy Moves In Real Time. Your Enforcement Strategy Should Too: A Review Of Notorious Markets For Counterfeiting And Piracy

In March 2026, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) released its 2025 Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy¹ (the “Notorious Markets List” or “NML”). The report highlights prominent examples of online and physical markets that reportedly engage in, facilitate or benefit from, substantial trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy.

A key takeaway: the Notorious Markets List should be viewed as a practical risk‑and‑enforcement roadmap—not a legal determination. The purpose of the report is to encourage platforms, market operators and governments to take more proactive steps to curb piracy and counterfeiting, and to reduce the downstream harm to right holders and consumers. ²

This year's report zeroes in on piracy of live events, (using sports broadcasts as a practical example), and highlights the increasing difficulty of protecting copyright in a digital ecosystem where the value of content peaks in real time. As the report emphasizes, effective enforcement now requires operating on “event time,” especially when infringement can erode a significant portion of value within minutes. ³That means stronger, more consistent consequences for repeat infringers and coordinated systems capable of detecting and taking down illegal streams in real time.⁴

The report also underscores that modern counterfeiting has become a genuinely cross‑channel problem, driven by the blending of e‑commerce, social media and paid advertising. USTR highlights growing concerns about counterfeit sales fueled by this “confluence” of channels, including fraudulent ads, links that lead to spoofed websites and influencers directing consumers to counterfeit listings.⁵ While many platforms still lack core anti-counterfeiting capabilities,⁶ the report acknowledges that some platforms have reported progress, such as expanded verification measures and a faster, more transparent take down process. ⁷ However, even if a takedown process is available, many hosting companies protect ownership and location details for domain name registrations, which can make it significantly harder to remove infringing listings.⁸

So what now? For brand owners, the report is a prompt to strengthen your “ready to enforce” posture. Keep a standing evidence package that includes registrations, authorized seller lists, product authentication markers, test‑buy protocols and side‑by‑side comparison templates so you can move quickly when a counterfeit surge appears. Look beyond marketplace listings and regularly audit the channels that drive traffic, including social ads, affiliate links and social storefronts. It is also important to create clear escalation paths for repeat sellers so you are not stuck in constant whack‑a‑mole takedowns.

For platforms and digital businesses, the report is a reminder that enforcement is fundamentally a systems problem. Strong seller onboarding, meaningful identity verification, real consequences for repeat infringers and transparent takedown workflows are all essential. The report also stresses the importance of ad moderation, since counterfeit demand is often created or amplified through paid ads and social promotion.⁹

For companies involved in live events or premium content, the report's focus on live events piracy reinforces the need for an “event‑mode” playbook. That means real‑time monitoring, rapid response protocols and prebuilt escalation contacts to minimize loss during the short window when content is most valuable.

Footnotes

1. Office of the United States Trade Representative, 2025 Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy (2025), https://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2025_Notorious_Markets_List.pdf.

2. Id. at 1-2.

3. Id. at 3.

4. Id.

5. Id. at 22-23.

6. Id.

7. Id.

8. Id. at 23.

9. Id. at 22-23.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.