EU enforcement of intellectual property rights : overall results of detentions, 2019.
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: European Union Intellectual Property Office
Subjects: EU Member State, application of the law, customs inspection, data collection, external border of the EU, industrial counterfeiting, intellectual property, report, single market

EU ENFORCEMENT OF 
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 
OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

June 2021 

 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- 

EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 
OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

ISBN 978-92-9156-291-6  doi: 10.2814/474589   TB-02-21-480-EN-N 

© European Union Intellectual Property Office, 2021 
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Foreword 

This new report, combining information about the enforcement of IP rights (IPR) based on detentions 

in the EU internal market in 2019 with the study on 2019 detentions at the EU border, published by 

DG TAXUD, helps to build an overall view of detentions in the EU needed to support coordinated 

action. 

Combining  the  separately  published  data  on  border  detentions  from  DG  TAXUD,  based  on  the 

content  of  the  European  Commission’s  centralised  database,  with  that  extracted  from  the  IP 

Enforcement  Portal  on  detentions  within  the  EU  is  another  positive  step  towards  providing  IP 

stakeholders,  researchers,  and  policymakers  with  a  more  comprehensive  picture,  available  in  a 

single report. 

The EUIPO would like to thank, once again, the enforcement authorities at national and EU level for 

their invaluable assistance and express its gratitude for all their efforts to maintain and improve the 

quality and usefulness of these exchanges. 

Christian Archambeau 

Executive Director EUIPO 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Acknowledgements 

This  report  was  prepared  by  the  European  Observatory  on  Infringements  of  Intellectual  Property 

Rights at the EUIPO in Alicante. 

It has been produced thanks to the EU national enforcement authorities’ commitment, on the one 

hand, to collect and transmit to the European Commission, through its EU centralised database (1), 

relevant information concerning customs enforcement of IPR at the EU external border; and, on the 

other hand, to develop and feed with data on detentions of goods infringing IPR within their national 

markets (2), the IP Enforcement Portal (3), thus launching the ‘IP Enforcement Portal community’. 

The authors are also grateful to the European Commission — Directorate-General for Taxation and 

Customs Union, Unit A5 ‘Protection of citizens and enforcement of IPR’, whose staff provided the 

data corresponding to the detentions at the EU border during 2019. This data could, therefore, also 

be integrated into the IP Enforcement Portal, allowing the overall analysis included in section 4. 

This gratitude is further increased considering that the collection and transmission of data were done 

during a period in which communication and coordination have been very difficult due to the health 

crisis ongoing since March 2020. 

(1)  In  accordance  with  the  relevant  EU  customs  legislation  (and,  in  particular,  Articles 31  and  32  of  Regulation  (EU) 

No 608/2013  of  12 June  2013),  the  EU  Commission  established  a  central  database,  named  COPIS,  containing  all 

applications for action and all detentions at the EU border. 

(2) To be succinct, the part of the EU internal market corresponding to a Member State will be referred to, throughout the 

report, as the Member State’s national market. 

(3) The IP Enforcement Platform contains, inter alia, the former ACIST database, which was launched in 2013 when, in line 

with  the  mandate  of  the  European  Observatory  on  Infringements  of  Intellectual  Property  Rights,  the  EUIPO  made  the 

database available to law enforcement authorities in all EU Member States. 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Table of Contents 

Foreword ...................................................................................................... 3 

Acknowledgements ..................................................................................... 4 

Table of Contents ........................................................................................ 5 

Executive Summary ..................................................................................... 6 

Report Content ............................................................................................ 8 

1 

Introduction ...................................................................................................... 8 

2  Communication  between  enforcers  and  rights  holders  through  the  IP 

Enforcement Portal ........................................................................................ 10 

3  Data range and limitations ............................................................................ 11 

4  Overall results ................................................................................................ 15 

4.1  Overall results: number of items and estimated value ................................ 15 

4.2  Data per Member State ................................................................................... 17 

4.3  Data per product subcategory ....................................................................... 19 

4.4  Data per allegedly infringed IP right .............................................................. 21 

4.5  Comparison of detentions at the EU border and in the EU internal market

 .......................................................................................................................... 23 

5  Conclusions ................................................................................................... 28 

6  Way forward ................................................................................................... 31 

References ................................................................................................. 32 

List of Tables and Figures ........................................................................ 34 

Glossary ..................................................................................................... 36 

Annexes ..................................................................................................... 37 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Executive Summary 

Following the publication, in December 2020, of the reports of DG TAXUD and the EUIPO on the 

detention  of  goods  infringing  IP  rights  at  the  EU  border ( 4 )  and  in  the  EU  internal  market ( 5 ) 

respectively, this report allows an overarching view of the overall detentions of fake products in 2019 

as reported by EU Member States (6). 

• 

Approximately 72 million fake items were detained in the EU in 2019. This implies a reduction 

of  almost  21 %  in  the  number  of  items  reported  as  detained,  compared  to  2018  (91 million 

items). Almost 56 % of those items were detained in the EU internal market, and the rest at 

the EU border. 

• 

Despite the large reduction in the number of fake items detained in the EU, their estimated 

value,  amounting  to  some EUR 2.4 billion,  represents  almost  no  decrease  compared to the 

previous  year.  What  at  first  glance  may  appear  to  be  a  contradiction  is  caused  by  the 

detentions in the EU internal market. As explained in the December 2020 report on detentions, 

in this instance it is due to the shift in the composition of the ‘basket’ of products detained, from 

cheaper products in 2018 (toys, packaging material) to more expensive ones in 2019 (clothing, 

clothing accessories, non-sport shoes), as well as the increase in the estimated unitary value 

of some products. Almost 73 % of the total value of detained items reported corresponded to 

detentions in the EU internal market, while the remainder resulted from detentions at the EU 

border. 

• 

The 10 Member States with the highest number of reported detentions accounted for around 

90 % of the volume and 92 % of the estimated value of the items. Italy recorded the highest 

(4) DG TAXUD (2020): Report on the EU customs enforcement of intellectual property rights. Results at the EU border, 

2019 

(5) EUIPO (2020): Report on the EU internal market enforcement of intellectual property rights: results of detentions in EU 

Member States, 2019 

(6) As the report refers to the detentions made during 2019 and as Brexit took effect on 01/02/2020, the United Kingdom 

is still referred to, throughout this report, as an EU Member State. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

individual figures, with over 41 % of the total detentions by volume and more than 48 % by 

estimated value. However, it should be recalled that no data is currently available for national 

market detentions in one of the larger Member States – Germany – or, partially, in the United 

Kingdom. 

• 

The four most common subcategories (7) of identified detained products, in terms of the number 

of items detained, were toys, cigarettes, clothing accessories and clothing. These accounted 

for almost 41 % of the products recorded. The volume of unidentified products, classified as 

other  goods,  is  still  important,  accounting  for  around  19 %  of  all  the  goods  detained  during 

2019. 

• 

In  terms  of  estimated  value  of  the  items  reported,  the  top  four  subcategories  of  products 

identified were led, by far, by clothing accessories, followed by clothing, watches and non-sport 

shoes.  These  four  represented  almost  61 %  of  the  estimated  value  of  detentions  reported 

during 2019. 

• 

The  predominant  categories  of  goods  detained  at  the  EU  border  during  2019  were  not  the 

same as those predominant in the detentions in the EU internal market. In terms of the quantity 

of  items  detained  during  2019,  the  subcategory  packaging  material  was  much  more 

predominant in the detentions at the EU border than in the EU internal market, whereas that 

of clothing accessories was much more predominant in the latter than in the former. In terms 

of their estimated value and during the same period, the subcategory clothing was much more 

predominant in the detentions at the EU border than in the EU internal market, whereas that 

of clothing accessories was even more predominant in the latter than in the former. 

• 

The distribution of IP rights allegedly infringed at the time of detention shows that trade marks 

predominate, as has historically been the case. Trade mark infringement accounted for almost 

90 % by number of items, and close to 96 % by estimated value of aggregated detentions at 

the EU border and in the EU internal market. 

(7) See the classification of products used in this report in Annex C and Annex D. 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Report Content 

1 

Introduction 

For about 20 years DG TAXUD has published annual reports containing yearly facts and figures in 

relation to the detentions of goods infringing IP rights at the EU border. On 17 December 2020, DG 

TAXUD published its latest Report on the EU customs enforcement of intellectual property rights: 

Results at the EU border, 2019. 

After  9 years  of  collecting  data  from  internal  market  enforcers  in  EU  Member  States,  the  EUIPO 

published, on the same date, its first Report on the EU internal market enforcement of intellectual 

property rights: results of detentions in EU Member States, 2019, which contained a parallel analysis 

of the detentions carried out by the EU internal market enforcers within many Member States (8), of 

the same types of goods, during the same period. This latter publication provided an enrichment of 

knowledge, with information on what was happening within the internal market. 

Moreover, in September 2019, the EUIPO published its Report on the EU enforcement of intellectual 

property  rights:  results  at  EU  borders  and  in  Member  States  2013-2017,  reviewing  trends  in 

detentions in these two scenarios, and analysing how EU border and internal market enforcement 

actions complemented each other during that period. As a follow up, the EUIPO is now publishing 

this first issue of a series of annual reports containing the aggregated data on overall detentions of 

goods infringing IPR both at the EU border and within the EU internal market. 

Therefore, this report on EU enforcement of intellectual property rights: Overall results of detentions, 

2019 has been produced from the overall analysis of the data on the detentions at the EU border, 

reported through COPIS by all the Member States’ customs authorities, and on the detentions within 

their national markets, reported through the IP Enforcement Portal by those of the 25 Member States’ 

(8) See footnote 6. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

enforcement authorities usually participating in the detentions data gathering section of the Portal (9) 

that were able to do it in 2019. It should be read in conjunction with the two reports published in 

December 2020 and, like them, it should provide useful information to support the analysis of IPR 

infringements in the EU and the development, by the relevant enforcement authorities, of appropriate 

countermeasures. On a broader scale, it aims to provide EU policymakers with data to develop an 

evidence base for priorities and policies. 

Unfortunately, for various reasons, some data on detentions in some national markets is missing. In 

some cases, none of the Member State’s enforcement authorities had shared their data with the IP 

Enforcement  Portal  community,  while  others  had  not  provided  full  data  sets.  Limitations  in  the 

availability of data on the EU internal market detentions, sometimes due to the impact of the COVID-

19 pandemic and the consequent lockdown, may partly affect the results of the analysis in this report. 

( 9 )  Records  on  national  markets’  detentions  from  the  Austrian,  Swedish  and  German  enforcement  authorities  are 

historically not reported in the Portal: the first because of the nature of their regulations; the second because there are 

currently  no  statistics  regarding  inland  detentions;  and  the  third  because  they  have  not  yet  joined  the  data  provision 

network. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

2  Communication  between  enforcers  and  rights 

holders through the IP Enforcement Portal 

Close cooperation between rights holders and enforcers, and the quality of the information shared, 

are of key importance for the latter’s enforcement work, both at the EU border and in the EU internal 

market. A constant, effective and fluent use of appropriate and secure bidirectional communication 

channels contributes to the necessary sharing of information between the two sets of actors. 

The  IP  Enforcement  Portal  has  been  developed  as  a  two-way  communication  system  between 

enforcers and IP rights holders. One of its functions is to offer the latter a system for sending alerts 

on  potential  infringements  securely  to  enforcers,  and  in  particular  to  police  forces.  This  system 

complements  the  customs  system  that  requires  a  formal  request  from  rights  holders  through 

Application for Actions; these formal requests are, as a result of the cooperation between DG TAXUD 

and EUIPO, now also available as an e-tool through the Portal. 

In 2018, a total of 1 793 alerts on potential infringements were sent by IP rights holders through the 

IP  Enforcement  Portal  and  were  received  by  59  EU  internal  market  or  EU  border  enforcement 

authorities with a mandate to detain counterfeit products. In 2019, as a consequence of the EUIPO’s 

training  activities,  the  quality  of  the  potential  infringement  notifications  to  enforcers  significantly 

improved,  while  the  total  number  decreased;  throughout  the  year,  974 notifications  of  potential 

infringements were sent by IP rights holders and were received by 65 enforcement authorities. 

The IP Enforcement Portal also offers the possibility for enforcers to communicate securely with IP 

rights holders about suspicions of potential infringements of their rights. In 2018, six suspicious cases 

were communicated by five enforcement authorities from both the EU border and national markets. 

In 2019,  153 suspicious cases  were  communicated  by 12 enforcement  authorities  from  the  same 

scenarios, representing a large increase in the use of this function. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

3  Data range and limitations 

The following information about available data ranges and limitations in their use needs to be taken 

into  consideration  for  a  correct  interpretation  of  the  analysis  contained  in  this  report.  More 

explanations about available data ranges and limitations in their use can be found in Annex B. 

• 

The  analysis,  including  the  graphs,  tables  and  rankings,  presented  in  section 4  has  been 

produced on the basis of data contained in and published on the IP Enforcement Portal for 

2019 detentions. Data concerning detentions at the EU border have been collated in the Portal 

based on data received in COPIS from the 28 Member States. Data concerning the detentions 

in the EU internal market have been provided directly to the Portal by the national enforcement 

authorities of 25 Member States. 

• 

All data available in the IP Enforcement Portal have been published online, either directly by 

the data owners (the respective enforcement authority), or by the national offices in charge of 

coordinating the provision of the data at national level (10). 

• 

The quality of the results of the analysis, as well as of any data, graphs, tables and rankings 

presented  in  this  report,  is  conditioned  by  the  quality  of  the  data  published  on  the  IP 

Enforcement Portal by, or on behalf of, the different reporting authorities. 

• 

In the same way as DG TAXUD’s reporting system, the IP Enforcement Portal collects data on 

the infringement of physical goods. Therefore, no data is provided on infringements related to 

intangible  goods,  such  as  online  piracy,  and  it  was  not  possible  to  incorporate  this  kind  of 

infringement into the report. 

• 

DG TAXUD systematically collects, through the EU Commission’s centralised database (see 

footnote 1), and reports on, the estimated total values of detentions at the EU border of goods 

infringing IP rights. The standard value for reporting by Member States is the domestic retail 

value (DRV), which is the retail price at which the goods would have been sold on the Member 

(10) In some cases, the data have been published indirectly by the EUIPO on their behalf and with their written approval. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

State’s  market,  had  they  been  genuine.  For  reasons  of  consistency,  the  reporting  in  the  IP 

Enforcement Portal of the estimated value of items detained in the EU internal market is also 

based on the estimated retail value of the genuine product, as reported by the corresponding 

reporting authorities. 

Consequently,  the  products’  estimated  retail  values  may  vary  from  one  Member  State  to 

another or from one moment in time to another. Therefore, the collected estimated retail values 

assigned to the detained products are influenced and conditioned by the characteristics of the 

equivalent genuine products. 

Moreover, the DRV method, particularly in the subcategories of luxury products, may lead to 

inflated estimated values of the goods detained, compared to alternative methods for valuing 

them. Indeed, in these subcategories (e.g. luxury watches), the retail price of the genuine good 

is much higher than that of, for instance, the fake product in the secondary markets (11) or than, 

alternatively,  its  cost.  These  are  two  alternative valuing  methods  that  could  also  have  been 

chosen. 

However,  the  estimated  value  per  item  is  not  a  mandatory  field  to  be  recorded  in  the  IP 

Enforcement Portal by EU internal market enforcement authorities. Where no estimated value 

per item is provided, figures on the economic value of the fake goods are estimated, based on 

‘economic indicators’. These economic indicators are calculated based on the ‘value per item’ 

of similar products contained in the DG TAXUD annual EU border detentions data. Assigning 

an estimated value to a detention on the basis of economic indicators introduces an additional 

limitation  to  the  accuracy  of  the  data  concerning  detentions  in  the  EU  internal  market  and, 

hence, in the overall detentions. 

• 

The universe of detentions at the EU border used for the analysis in section 4, and recorded 

in the IP Enforcement Portal, does not coincide exactly with that used for the analysis in DG 

TAXUD’s December 2020 report on detentions of goods infringing IP rights at the EU border, 

which  are  contained  in COPIS.  Indeed,  after  suspending  the  release  of  items  suspected  of 

(11) Markets in which the buyers are completely aware that the products are counterfeits and in which they would therefore 

never pay the DRV. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

infringing IP rights, customs authorities can either release them later, have them destroyed, or 

keep them under supervision for as long as the procedures for determining the infringement 

run.  Only  the  last  two  situations,  which  both  result  in  the  goods  very  likely  to  be  ‘fake’,  are 

reported  in  the  IP  Enforcement  Portal.  Since  the  IP  Enforcement  Portal  simply  contains  a 

subset of COPIS data, the number of procedures registered in the IP Enforcement Portal is 

lower than those registered in COPIS by Member States’ customs authorities. Since 2013, the 

ratio between the subset of procedures at the EU border recorded in the IP Enforcement Portal 

and those recorded in the COPIS database has remained stable, ranging from 90 % to 92 % 

of  the  detentions  (90 %  in  2018  and  91 %  in  2019).  This  ratio  would  be  an  indicator  of  the 

minimum  level  of  effectiveness  of  customs  controls,  meaning  that,  in  91 %  of  detention 

procedures,  the  identification  of  suspected  goods  by  customs  (together  with  the  IP  rights 

holders) was confirmed. 

Moreover, the fields recorded in COPIS for a detention procedure referring to the itinerary of 

the  goods  detained  (countries  of  provenance  and  destination,  etc.)  and  to  the  result  of  the 

detention  (destruction  under  standard  procedure  or  procedure  for  small  consignments, 

release,  etc.)  have  not  been  systematically  stored  in  the  IP  Enforcement  Portal.  This  is 

because the equivalent information for detentions in the EU internal market is rarely, if ever, 

available (see section B.2 in Annex B), or the information is too specific to detentions at the 

EU border. 

Finally, as far as the data on detentions of fakes in the EU internal market are concerned, the 

IP Enforcement Portal is a living and dynamic tool, into which IP rights enforcers may upload 

data in several bulks, and may further update the information, since the Portal is used by a 

number of them as their own reporting tool. Consequently, an EU internal market enforcement 

authority could continue to load marginal bulks of detention data or to enter updates after the 

extraction for the analysis of a certain period has been done. This was the case of Belgium for 

2019 detentions in their national market data, where additional data on this set of detentions 

were uploaded after the data had been extracted for the analysis of the EUIPO’s December 

2020 report. However, these additional data have been extracted and included in the current 

report. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

As a result, the data on overall detentions of fake goods presented in this report do not coincide 

with the exact sum of the data on detentions at the EU border in the DG TAXUD December 

2020 report plus those on detentions in the EU internal market described in the parallel EUIPO 

report. 

• 

Besides the usual data availability issues, the exceptional situation of the COVID-19 pandemic 

and its consequences throughout the first half of 2020 have conditioned the availability of data 

sets  on  detentions  in  the  EU  internal  market  and,  hence,  on  overall  detentions.  Logically, 

national market enforcement authorities had to prioritise duties other than those in the field of 

intellectual  property,  and  some  were  not  able to report their  detentions  carried  out  in  2019. 

Other  customs  authorities,  with  jurisdiction  in  their  national  market,  were  blocked  by  the 

lockdown, with a similar effect on their reporting tasks. As explained in the EUIPO’s December 

2020 report, these gaps in information were estimated at around 5 million items (not) reported 

as detained, within a global reduction of 30 million fewer items reported as detained in the EU 

internal market in 2019, compared to the previous year. 

• 

Only  two  common  parameters,  used  by  all  the  EU  internal  market  reporting  enforcement 

authorities, can be exploited for analysis and comparison in the overall results: the number of 

detained items, and their estimated value. The number of cases and the number of procedures 

are not parameters that can be used in the analysis of the set of overall data since, in many 

cases, EU internal market reporting enforcement authorities aggregate the results of several 

procedures or cases into one record in their reports. 

• 

Finally, due to the unavailability of values in some fields in the data of the detentions in Member 

States’ national markets, an analysis from some angles, in particular those related to routes 

and transport, cannot be done for the overall detentions. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

4  Overall results 

The IP Enforcement Portal provides an overview of the reported detentions of fake products by EU 

Member  States:  both  those  made  by  the  customs  authorities  at  the  EU  border,  and  those  made 

within the EU by the competent law enforcement authorities (12). 

4.1  Overall results: number of items and estimated value 

Although the number of items reported as detained because of alleged infringement of IP rights (13) 

differed a lot depending on the subcategory of products (which vary greatly in size and weight), the 

measurement  of  the  fake  goods  detained  gives  an  idea  of  the  results  of  the  effort  made  by  the 

different EU enforcement authorities. 

The  number  of  fake  goods  detained  in  the  EU  during  2019  was  around  72 million,  showing  a 

significant decrease (-21 %) in comparison with the 2018 figures (around 91 million; see Figure 4-1 

below). Moreover, as already explained in the EUIPO’s December 2020 report (14), the fact that fewer 

national market enforcement authorities reported detentions, compared to 2018, does not explain 

this significant reduction. 

Besides, the proportion of fake goods detained in the EU internal market in 2019 reached around 

56 % of the total, while the share of border detentions accounted for the remaining 44 %. In 2018, 

the proportion of fake goods detained in the EU national markets represented almost 80 % of all IP 

crime  detentions.  As  can  be  easily  inferred  from  the  December  2020  reports,  the  reason  for  the 

severe decrease of this share is twofold: the number of fake goods detained at the EU border during 

2019 increased by more than 50 %, while those detained in the EU internal market during the same 

period decreased by more than 40 % (in both cases compared with the previous year). 

(12) To understand some of the limitations on the analysis, caused by the availability of data, please see section 3 Data 

range and limitations. 

(13) Hereinafter ‘fake goods detained’. 

(14) See page 13 of EUIPO (2020): Report on the EU internal market enforcement of intellectual property rights: results of 

detentions in EU Member States, 2019. 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Figure 4-1: Reported quantity and estimated value of items detained. 

The estimated value of the fake goods detained in the EU in 2019 was some EUR 2.4 billion (see 

Figure 4-1 above). Despite the large reduction in the number of fake goods detained in the EU, this 

estimated value represents a very slight decrease (around 2 %) compared to the previous year. 

What at first glance may appear to be a contradiction is caused, in particular, by the detentions in 

the EU internal market. As explained in the EUIPO’s December 2020 report on detentions in this 

geographical scenario, this is due to the shift in the composition of the ‘basket’ of products detained, 

from cheaper products in 2018 (toys, packaging material) to more expensive ones in 2019 (clothing, 

clothing accessories, non-sport shoes), as well as to the increase in the estimated unitary value of 

some products (see section 4.3). 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

The fake goods detained in the EU internal market represented almost 73 % of the estimated value 

of the overall items detained, with the remaining 27 % corresponding to fake goods detained at the 

EU border. This distribution was 74 % – 26 % in 2018. 

4.2  Data per Member State 

The distribution by Member State of the share of fake goods detained in 2019, in terms of the number 

of  articles  detained,  can  be  seen  in  Figure 4-2  below.  The  same  distribution,  but  in  terms  of  the 

estimated value of the detentions, is shown in Figure 4-3. 

Figure 4-2: Share of reported detentions by Member State (number of reported items detained) in 2019. 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Figure 4-3: Share of reported detentions by Member State (estimated value of reported items detained) in 2019. 

The cumulated share of fake goods detained by the top 10 Member States in 2019 corresponds to 

almost 90 % of the articles detained and over 92 % of their estimated value. 

Furthermore, as shown in Figure 4-2 and Figure 4-3 above, just one Italian enforcement authority (15) 

reported over 41 % of the articles detained and more than 48 % of their total value. 

Moreover, worthy of mention is the presence among the top 10 Member States of Malta, a Member 

State  that  can  objectively  be  classified  as  small  from  different  perspectives  (surface,  population, 

GDP, etc.). 

Finally, only Italy, France and Spain remain in the 2019 top five, from both the perspective of number 

of items and that of estimated value. Additionally, Romania and the Czech Republic are included in 

the  top  five  from  the  perspective  of  the  number  of  items  and  Greece  and  Germany  from  that  of 

value (16). 

(15) While only one of the various Italian bodies responsible for EU internal market infringements was able to provide data 

for 2019, historically, this authority alone has reported more than 85 % of the total detentions in Italy in earlier years. 

(16) It should, however, be remembered that no data is currently available for national market detentions in one of the larger 

Member States, Germany, and, partially, in the United Kingdom. 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

4.3  Data per product subcategory 

Data on the share of the number of items detained by subcategory of products (see Figure 4-4 below) 

show  that  the  top  five  subcategories  identified  in  terms  of  the  number  of  items  in  2019  are  toys, 

cigarettes, clothing accessories, clothing and packaging materials (17). 

Exactly the same subcategories appeared in the top five in 2018, the only variation being the order 

of their positions. Toys, clothing accessories and clothing appeared quite consistently in previous 

annual top rankings per number of items. 

Moreover, the recurrent appearance in the top 10 subcategories (in terms of quantity) of two specific 

product subcategories – packaging material (5th among identified subcategories) and labels, tags, 

stickers (8th) – must be highlighted, since they have the effect of enabling the production of more 

fake  products  and,  consequently,  have  the  capacity  to  cause  additional  harm.  These  categories 

already occupied the 2nd and 6th positions in the ranking of subcategories identified in 2018. 

The volume of unidentified products – classified as other goods – is still important, making up around 

19 % of all the goods detained during 2019 (18). 

Finally, in comparison with the 2018 figures, not many changes appear in the top 14 subcategories 

per number of detained items. There is some movement up or down, but no different subcategories. 

However, these changes in the ranking of the types of products detained, combined with the changes 

in their estimated unitary value, are behind the abovementioned negligible reduction of the estimated 

value of items detained in the EU in 2019 compared to that of 2018 (section 4.1). 

(17) The term ‘remaining subcategories’ refers to all the subcategories mentioned in  Annex C and Annex D that are not 

specifically mentioned in the chart. 

(18)However, as reported by DG TAXUD in their December 2020 report, in 2019 there was a singularity within the goods 

detained at the EU border and classified under the other goods category, related to  the exceptionally large quantity of 

matches detained, which represented 90% of the other goods category items. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Indeed,  the  causes  of  this  apparently  contradictory  reduction  in  the  estimated  value  of  the  items 

detained  in  2019  vis-à-vis  the  reduction  of  21 %  in  the  number  of  items  detained  (in  both  cases 

compared to the data of 2018), are twofold: 

1. 

the shift in the composition of the basket of products detained from cheaper products in 2018 

to more expensive ones in 2019 (19); 

2. 

the  increase  in  the  estimated  unitary  value  of  some  of  the  more  abundantly  detained 

products (20) and of some of the more expensive products (21). 

The  first  of  these  causes  contributed  by  two  thirds  to  the  near  neutralisation  of  the  otherwise 

expected interannual decrease in the estimated value of the detained products. 

Figure 4-4: Subcategories of products reported as detained during 2019 (share of number of items). 

Data  on  the  share  of  the  estimated  value  of  items  detained  by  subcategory  of  products  (see 

Figure 4-5 below) show clothing accessories, clothing, watches, non-sport shoes and bags, wallets, 

purses as the top five subcategories identified in 2019 (17). 

(19)  e.g.  in  2019  more  clothing accessories  -  estimated value  ±EUR 80/unit  -,  more  non-sport  shoes  -  estimated value 

±EUR 83/unit-,  more  clothing  -  estimated  value  ±EUR 52/unit  -  but  fewer  toys  at  ±EUR 6/unit  and  fewer  packaging 

materials at ±EUR 1/unit. 

(20) e.g. clothing accessories: unit value  17 %; clothing:  30 %. 

(21) e.g. mobile phones: unit value  72 %; jewellery:  152 %. 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Figure 4-5: Subcategories of products reported as detained during 2019 (share of estimated value of the items). 

From those top five subcategories, watches; non-sport shoes and bags, wallets, purses belong to 

the type of subcategory with a high value per unit, which would explain their appearance on the list, 

while clothing and clothing accessories are there because of the high number of items detained, as 

shown in the previous figure (see Figure 4-4 above). 

Finally, the subcategories of clothing accessories, watches and bags, wallets, purses appear quite 

consistently in the annual top rankings by estimated value. 

4.4  Data per allegedly infringed IP right 

The 2019 distribution of the allegedly infringed (22) IP rights at the time of detention shows that trade 

marks continue to be the predominant right infringed. In 2019, almost 90 % of fake goods detained 

corresponded  to  detentions  where  at  least  one  trade  mark  was  infringed.  This  was  followed  by 

designs and, far behind, by patents and copyright (see Figure 4-6 below (23)). 

(22) Hereinafter ‘infringed’. 

(23) Percentages total more than 100 % because, both in COPIS and on the IP Enforcement Platform, there can be several 

infringed IP rights in the same record. 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

A similar trend appeared in terms of the estimated value of items: in 2019 close to 96 % of this value 

related to detentions where at least one trade mark was infringed, again followed by designs and, 

far behind, by copyright and patents (see Figure 4-7 below (23)). 

Figure 4-6: Ratio of quantity of items detained during 2019 by type of IP right and by type of detention. 

Figure 4-7: Ratio of estimated value of items detained during 2019 by type of IP right and by type of detention. 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

The share of detentions failing to report at least one IP right as a basis for its enforcement (which 

reached significant values during the period 2013-2017) has clearly decreased over the years, being 

negligible  (less  than  0.4 %)  in  2019.  This  increase  in  precision,  concentrated  in  the  data  on 

detentions in the EU internal market, allowed for a better quality analysis. 

Moreover, in 2019, the ‘weight’ of designs as infringed IPR was higher in terms of the number of 

items  detained  than  in  terms  of  estimated  value,  contrary  to  the  trend  in  previous  years.  This  is 

because,  among  the  goods  for  which  design  plays  an  important  role,  the  number  of  detained 

products with a higher unit value (normally related to luxury: jewellery, non-sport shoes) decreased 

in  2019  compared  to  2018.  They  were  replaced  by  products  with  a  lower  unit  value  (packaging 

materials). Indeed,  the weight  of  designs  as  infringed  IPR  in  2019  was among  the  highest  in the 

product subcategories of packaging materials, mobile phones and audio/video apparatus. Copyright 

appears  to  be  mostly  infringed  in  recorded  CDs/DVDs,  whereas  patents  are  mostly  declared  as 

infringed  IPR  in  the  subcategories  of  memory  card/sticks  and  medicines.  However,  in  all  these 

subcategories, with the exception of recorded CDs/DVDs, trade marks are still the predominant IPR 

infringed. 

4.5  Comparison of detentions at the EU border and in the EU internal market 

Although in the previous sections the breakdown between detentions at the EU border and in the 

EU  internal  market  was  shown  for  some  characteristics ( 24),  the  comparison  of  the  number  of 

detentions carried out at the EU border and in the EU internal market deserves a deeper analysis, 

in particular per subcategory of products and per Member State. 

(24) See section 4.1 for overall detention figures and sections 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 for figures by, respectively, Member State, 

subcategory of products and type of infringed IP right. 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

4.5.1 

Per subcategory of products 

The  purpose  of  this  section  is  to  highlight  the  main  differences  existing  in  the  subcategories  of 

products predominantly detained in the two different scenarios of action of the IP rights enforcement 

authorities in the EU. 

The methodology used, described in detail in Annex E, was based on the gap between the share 

that a subcategory of products represented in the detentions at the EU border and the share that the 

same products represented in detentions in the EU internal market. The shares were calculated for 

a  comparable  subset  of  Member  States  in  which  the  two  sets  of  data  were  solidly  available  in 

2019 (25). This gap, or delta, is called ‘Δ𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒’. The bigger the delta, the larger the difference in the 

results  of  detentions  of  such  products  at  the  EU  border  versus  in  the  EU  internal  market  for  the 

selected subset. Positive gaps or deltas mean that the share of detentions of those subcategories of 

goods is higher at the EU border than in the EU internal market, and vice versa. 

The subcategories for which these deltas were higher than 2 % in 2019 are shown below. Figure 4-8 

shows data by number of items and Figure 4-9 by estimated value. 

r
e
d
r
o
b
U
E

t
a

e
r
o
M

t
e
k
r
a
m

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

U
E
n

i

e
r
o
M

Figure 4-8: Difference in the share of detentions at the EU border versus in the EU internal market by number of items for 

the selected subset. 

(25) This subset contains detentions in 2019 in all the EU Member States except Austria, Finland, Germany, Luxembourg, 

Sweden and the United Kingdom. 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

r
e
d
r
o
b
U
E

t
a

e
r
o
M

t
e
k
r
a
m

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

U
E
n

i

e
r
o
M

Figure 4-9: Difference in the share of detentions at the EU border versus in the EU internal market by estimated value of 

items for the selected subset. 

The analysis of this delta by subcategory of products, in terms of both quantity of items and their 

estimated value, shows that the enforcement authorities acting in the EU internal market and those 

acting at the EU border detain different types of goods. 

The combination of both figures indicates that there was a relative predominance of detentions at 

the EU border of goods belonging to the subcategories packaging materials and clothing, whereas 

the relative  predominance of  detentions  in  the  EU  internal market  was of  goods  belonging to the 

subcategory clothing accessories. 

An analysis by some Member States confirmed the existence of even bigger differences in share 

between the types of goods detained at a Member State’s EU border and in its national market, thus 

confirming  increasing  national  gaps  between  the  predominant  categories  of  products  detained  in 

each scenario. For instance, detentions during 2019 of other body care items represented a share 

of 37 % more at France’s EU border than in its national market. Detentions of toys represented a 

share of 54 % more at Italy’s EU border than in its national market. Conversely, the detentions during 

2019 of alcoholic beverages in Spain’s national market represented a share of 42 % more than at 

Spain’s EU border. 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

4.5.2 

Per Member State 

The purpose of this section is to delve deeper into the main differences in the volumes and estimated 

value  of  the  detentions  in  the  two  different  scenarios  of  the  enforcement  authorities’  action  (the 

national market and the EU border) in each Member State. 

Figure 4-2  and  Figure 4-3  in  section 4.2  already  indicate  that  there  is  a  set  of  Member  States  in 

which,  during  2019,  the  volume  and  estimated  value  of  the  detentions  in  their  national  markets 

largely exceeded those at their corresponding part of the EU border. This was a constant pattern in 

past years. 

As described under the methodology applied in the previous section, any deeper analysis of these 

differences should be done using a comparable subset of Member States and years in which the 

sets of data on detentions in the two scenarios were solidly available (26). 

Results  of  the  analysis  show  that,  although  Italy  is  clearly  the  main  driving  force  behind  the 

preponderance of detentions in the EU internal market over those at the EU border, other Member 

States also contribute to this preponderance, both in terms of quantity of items detained and of their 

estimated value. 

Indeed,  as  shown  in  Figure 4-10  and  Figure 4-11  below,  which  correspond  to  the  aggregated 

detentions during the period 2016-2019 in each of the 17 Member States referred to in footnote 26, 

besides Italy, Spain, France and Cyprus contribute to the historical preponderance of detentions in 

the  internal  market,  both  in  terms  of  quantity  and  estimated  value  of  items  detained.  Moreover, 

Bulgaria, Ireland and Portugal also show this preponderance in terms of quantity of items detained 

and the Czech Republic, Greece and Croatia in terms of their estimated value. 

A  detailed  year-by-year  analysis  from  2016  to  2019  shows  that  the  pattern  described  above  is 

constant over the years. 

(26)  This  subset  contains  detentions  in  2016,  2017,  2018  and  2019  in  the  following  17  EU  Member  States:  Belgium, 

Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, 

Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia. 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Figure 4-10: Share of the quantity of items detained at the EU border and in the EU internal market. Period 2016-2019. 

Figure 4-11: Share of the value of items detained at the EU border and in the EU internal market. Period 2016-2019. 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

5  Conclusions 

Aggregating the data on detentions of fake goods both at the EU border and in the EU internal market 

makes  it  possible  to  understand  the  overarching  dimension  of  the  phenomenon  of  detentions  of 

goods infringing IP rights in the EU as a whole. 

• 

Overall detentions of fake goods by EU enforcers showed a downward trend: from volumes of 

detentions of around 100 million items during the period 2012-2015 (27) to some 70-80 million 

items during the period 2016-2019 (28). Overall volumes of items detained in 2019 showed a 

sharp decrease compared to the previous year (from 91 million items to 72 million). 

• 

In terms of estimated value, however, overall detentions showed a rather stable pattern over 

the past years, particularly during the years covered by this report (2019 compared to 2018, 

both showing an overall estimated value of detentions of around EUR 2.45 billion). However, 

there were previous higher peaks in the estimated value of fake goods detained, which were 

clearly reached at the beginning of the available historical series (around EUR 3-3.5 billion per 

year in the period 2012-2014). 

The fact that the estimated value did not decrease in 2019 in the same proportion as the number of 

items – compared to 2018 – was the result of a steady increase in the average estimated value per 

unit  during that  period. As  seen in section 4.3,  this  increase  was  more due to  a reshaping  of  the 

basket of detained products towards more expensive ones than to the mere increase in the estimated 

unit value of each product. 

The breakdowns of overall detentions showed a rather constant pattern during the period 2018-2019. 

When looking at: 

• 

the Member States, Italy consistently appeared in the top position (around 40 % of the overall 

detentions); 

(27) With the singularity of 80 million items in 2014. 

(28) With 2018 as an exceptional year reaching 90 million items. 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

• 

the  categories  of  products,  toys,  clothing  accessories  and  clothing  (consistently  cumulating 

more than 30 % of the overall detentions) maintained the top positions, accompanied in 2019 

by cigarettes (with an additional 10 %); and 

• 

the infringed IP rights, trade marks took the biggest share (around 90 %). 

As  seen  in  the  analysis,  this  recurrence  was  closely  related  to  the  overwhelming  share  that 

detentions in the EU internal market and, in particular, in Italy’s national market, took of the total. 

On  the  other  hand,  maintaining  the  breakdown  of  the  overall  figures  by  the  two  scenarios  of 

detentions (at the EU border and in the EU internal market), allows for a comparison between the 

results of the enforcement authorities in these two scenarios, which showed very different behaviours 

in 2019. 

In terms of volumes of fake goods detained: 

• 

the  EU  internal  market  suffered  a  significant  decrease  in  2019  (falling  to  40 million  items 

detained) after 3 years of constant increases; 

• 

the  EU  border  showed,  conversely,  a  sharp  increase  in  2019  (reaching  32 million  items 

detained) after a downward trend for 3 consecutive years. 

Whereas in terms of estimated value: 

• 

detentions  at  the  EU  border  showed  a  rather  modestly  increasing  pattern,  always  around 

EUR 0.55-0.65 billion  each  year  during  the  period  2017-2019,  which  is  consistent  with  the 

corresponding pattern of the number of items detained; 

• 

the fake goods detained at the EU internal market, in contrast, showed a stable pattern that 

did  not  correspond  to  that  of  the  number  of  items  detained,  remaining  at  around 

EUR 1.8 billion. 

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Despite the variations described in the previous paragraphs, reported detentions of fake goods in 

the EU internal market, even with their limitations in terms of availability and quality of data, have 

been historically more voluminous and of higher estimated values than those at the EU border. This 

was  still  the  case  in  2018  and  in  2019.  As  seen  in  the  analysis  of  the  detentions  in  a  subset  of 

Member States and years (29), it was due to the overwhelming preponderance of detentions in the 

Italian national market over the detentions at its corresponding part of the EU border. Other Member 

States however, such as Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Cyprus 

and Portugal contributed – although to a lesser extent than Italy – to this preponderance of detentions 

in the EU internal market, in terms of quantity and estimated value of the items, over those at the EU 

border. 

Moreover, in terms of the types of goods detained in one or the other enforcement scenarios, the 

data  from  2019  in  a  subset  of  Member  States ( 30 )  continued  to  show  that  the  efforts  of  the 

corresponding  enforcers  gave  better  results  in  different  categories  of  goods.  The  top  detained 

products at the EU border of those Member States were not the same as in their corresponding part 

of the EU internal market, and vice versa. Packaging materials and clothing at their EU border and 

clothing  accessories  in  their  national  markets  were  the  categories  showing  larger  gaps  of 

predominance between the two scenarios in these Member States. 

However,  as  previously  mentioned,  there  was  almost  no  difference  in  the  overwhelming 

predominance in both scenarios of trade marks as the main IP right infringed. This was true both in 

2018 and in 2019 (31), although with a sharper predominance in the EU internal market (32). 

(29)  As mentioned  in  footnote  25,  in  2019  the  subset  of  Member  States  reporting  solid  figures  of  detentions  in  the  two 

scenarios did not include Austria, Finland, Germany, Luxembourg, Sweden nor the United Kingdom. 

(30) As mentioned in footnote 26, the subset of Member States reporting solid figures of detentions in the two scenarios 

during  the  period  2016-2019  included  Belgium,  Bulgaria,  Czech  Republic,  Denmark,  Ireland,  Greece,  Spain,  France, 

Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia. 

(31) Over 79 % of the cases in both, whether by number of items or by estimated value. 

(32) Over 95 % of the cases, again whether by number of items or by estimated value. 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

6  Way forward 

The EUIPO’s December 2020 report on detentions of goods infringing IP rights in the EU internal 

market during 2019 mentioned a set of activities aimed at advancing towards its mandate to produce 

evidence-based  materials  to  help  IPR  enforcement  authorities  in  their  efforts  and  to  inform 

policymakers  about  the  results  of  those  efforts  in  this  particular  universe  of  detentions.  These 

activities were: 

• 

to facilitate a proper  dialogue between the two main sets of actors (enforcement authorities 

and rights holders), so as to increase their cooperation and the sharing of information in the 

scenario  of  the  EU  internal  market,  systematising,  whenever  possible,  information  sharing 

through the existing tools and, particularly with regard to internal market data, through the IP 

Enforcement Portal; 

• 

to increase information and training on IP rights that are more difficult to understand than trade 

marks  and  designs,  in  order  to  help  enforcement  authorities  to  become  accustomed  to 

identifying the remaining, not always so evident, infringed IP rights; 

• 

to improve the quantity of data reported, whether by transferring all data already available in 

other existing sources to the Portal, or by increasing the data collected at these sources; 

• 

to improve the quality of data reported, whether by providing new training resources for the 

enforcers belonging to the IP Enforcement Portal community, or by expanding the choice of 

values used by the enforcers for tracking the different aspects of a detention. 

An  interesting  additional  dimension  could  make  the  analysis  of  results  more  useful  for  policy 

decisions by relating the volumes of the detentions of fake products to trade volumes (e.g. imports 

of  genuine  products,  estimated  trade  of  fakes,  sales  of  genuine  products).  This  analysis  would 

require  availability  of  data  and  preparatory  work,  in  particular  to  define  appropriate  equivalences 

between the nomenclatures used to classify detained and traded goods. 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

References 

Regulation  (EU)  No 608/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  12 June  2013 

concerning  customs  enforcement  of  intellectual  property  rights  and  repealing  Council  Regulation 

(EC) No 1383/2003: 

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:181:0015:0034:en:PDF 

Regulation (EU) No 386/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council  of 19 April 2012 on 

entrusting the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) with tasks 

related  to  the  enforcement  of  intellectual  property  rights,  including  the  assembling  of  public  and 

private-sector representatives as a European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property 

Rights: 

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32012R0386 

Directive  2004/48/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  29 April  2004  on  the 

enforcement of intellectual property rights: 

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2004/48/corrigendum/2004-06-02/oj 

DG TAXUD (2020) Report on the EU customs enforcement of intellectual property rights. Results at 

the EU border, 2019: 

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/ipr_report_2020.5464_en_04.pdf 

EUIPO (2020) Report on the EU internal market enforcement of intellectual property rights: results 

of detentions in EU Member States, 2019: 

https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnel-

web/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/observatory/documents/reports/2020_Report_on_dete

ntions_in_EU_MS_during_2019/2020_Report_on_detentions_in_EU_MS_during_2019_FullR_en.

pdf 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

EUIPO (2019) Report on the EU enforcement of intellectual property rights: results at EU borders 

and in Member States 2013-2017: 

https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnel-

web/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/observatory/documents/reports/2019_Report_on_Enf

orcement_of_IPR_at_EU_borders_and_in_MS_2013_2017/2019_Report_on_enforcement_of_IPR

_at_EU_borders_and_in_MS_2013_2017_Full_en.pdf 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

List of Tables and Figures 

Tables 

Table A-1: EU national markets reporting enforcement authorities. ............................................... 40 

Table B-1: Availability of records for EU internal market detentions per reporting EU Member State 

and year. ....................................................................................................................................... 43 

Table C-1: Upper-level DG TAXUD products classification. .......................................................... 45 

Table C-2: Lower-level DG TAXUD products classification (subcategories). ................................. 46 

Table D-1: Additional upper-level products classification. .............................................................. 47 

Table D-2: Additional lower-level products classification (subcategories). ..................................... 47 

Figures 

Figure 4-1: Reported quantity and estimated value of items detained. .......................................... 16 

Figure 4-2: Share of reported detentions by Member State (number of reported items detained) in 

2019. ............................................................................................................................................. 17 

Figure 4-3:  Share  of  reported  detentions  by  Member  State  (estimated  value  of  reported  items 

detained) in 2019. ......................................................................................................................... 18 

Figure 4-4: Subcategories of products reported as detained during 2019 (share of number of items).

 ..................................................................................................................................................... 20 

Figure 4-5: Subcategories of products reported as detained during 2019 (share of estimated value 

of the items). ................................................................................................................................. 21 

Figure 4-6:  Ratio  of  quantity  of  items  detained  during  2019  by  type  of  IP  right  and  by  type  of 

detention. ...................................................................................................................................... 22 

Figure 4-7: Ratio of estimated value of items detained during 2019 by type of IP right and by type of 

detention. ...................................................................................................................................... 22 

Figure 4-8: Difference in the share of detentions at the EU border versus in the EU internal market 

by number of items for the selected subset. .................................................................................. 24 

Figure 4-9: Difference in the share of detentions at the EU border versus in the EU internal market 

by estimated value of items for the selected subset. ..................................................................... 25 

Figure 4-10: Share of the quantity of items detained at the EU border and in the EU internal market. 

Period 2016-2019. ........................................................................................................................ 27 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Figure 4-11: Share of the value of items detained at the EU border and in the EU internal market. 

Period 2016-2019. ........................................................................................................................ 27 

Figure A-1: Number of detaining customs offices in 2019 per Member State. ............................... 37 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Glossary 

EU 

European Union 

DG TAXUD 

European  Commission’s  Directorate-General 

for  Taxation  and 

EUIPO 

COPIS 

Customs Union 

European Union Intellectual Property Office 

The  EU  central  database,  established  by  DG  TAXUD  pursuant  to 

Articles 31  and  32  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 608/2013,  containing  all 

applications for action and all detentions at the EU border 

ACIST 

The  acronym  of  Anti-Counterfeiting  Intelligence  Support  Tool,  the 

name of the former database on EU border and EU internal market 

detentions  provided  by  the  EUIPO,  now  integrated  into  the  IP 

Enforcement  Portal,  the  single  EU  platform  to  deal  with  IPR 

enforcement matters. ACIST was the European Union database that 

previously  gathered  statistics  on  detentions  of  articles  suspected  of 

infringing IPR at the EU border and in the EU internal market 

IP 

IPR 

Fake 

Intellectual property 

IP right(s) 

A product allegedly infringing any kind of IPR 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Annexes 

Annex A. 

Enforcement Authorities 

A.1  EU BORDER ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES 

In  the  EU  border  scenario,  the  enforcement  authorities  are  the  customs  officers  in  the  customs 

offices, who regularly report – through one reporting authority per Member State and using COPIS 

– data on detentions of goods allegedly infringing IP rights. 

In 2019, almost 600 different customs offices were behind the detentions reported by the Member 

States’  customs  reporting  authorities.  The  distribution  of  these  offices  by  Member  State  reflects, 

however, how Member States have organised customs offices and controls in different ways (see 

Figure A-1). 

Figure A-1: Number of detaining customs offices in 2019 per Member State. 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

A.2  EU INTERNAL MARKET ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES 

In  the  EU  internal  market  scenario,  there  are  a  number  of  enforcement  authorities  with  the  legal 

powers to detain IPR-infringing goods, and which report about those detentions. These are included 

in Table A-1. 

COUNTRY 

ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES  DISCLAIMERS 

Belgium 

FSP Economy 

Ministry of Interior. General 
Directorate Combating Organised 
Crime 

The  General  Directorate  Combating  Organised  Crime 
has  been  in  charge  of  the  collection  of  counterfeit  and 
pirated goods since January 2016. 

Bulgaria 

Ministry of Interior. Directorate 
National Police 

The  National  Police  Directorate  was  in  charge  of  the 
collection  of  counterfeit  and  pirated  goods  until 
December 2015. 

The Croatian Police do not report item values. Therefore, 
the  item  value  used  for  the  total  detention  estimation 
(EUR) is the value used in the yearly publication of DG 
TAXUD reports. 

Customs Intelligence and 
Investigation Directorate. National 
Customs Agency 

Criminal Police Directorate – 
Cyber Security Department – 
Croatia 

Ministry of Finance. Customs 
Directorate 

Cyprus Police. Department of 
Combating Crime 

Customs and Excise Department. 
IPR Unit 

Croatia 

Cyprus 

Czech 
Republic 

General Directorate of Customs. 
Customs Department 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

State Prosecutor for Serious 
Economic and International 
Crime 

Estonian Police and Border 
Guard Board  

Customs Enforcement 
Department. Analysis Unit 

Gendarmerie Nationale 

Direction Générale des Douanes 
et Droits Indirects 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Greece 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Interagency for Market Control 
(DIMEA), Hellenic Ministry of 
Development and Investments – 
Greece 

Greek enforcement authorities do not report item values. 
Therefore,  the  item  value  used  for  the  total  detention 
estimation  (EUR)  is  the  value  used  in  the  yearly 
publication of DG TAXUD reports. 

Hungarian National Police. 
Criminal Directorate. Criminal 
Division 

National Tax and Customs 
Administration. Department of 
Enforcement 

An Garda Siochana. Intellectual 
Property Crime Unit / Irish Tax 
and Customs 

An Garda Siochana. Intellectual 
Property Crime Unit 

The  Hungarian  National  Police  are  in  charge  of  inland 
detentions of only medical and pharmaceutical products. 

Internal market data published by Irish Tax and Customs 
authority resulted from joint enforcement operations 

Italy 

Ministero dello Sviluppo 
Economico. Direzione Generale 
per la Lotta alla Contraffazione. 
Ufficio Italiano Brevetti e Marchi 

the 

that  of 

The Italian system of data aggregation does not match 
with 
IP  Enforcement  Portal;  as  a 
consequence,  data  on  internal  detentions  of  foodstuffs 
and beverages, tobacco products and medicine products 
are not loaded into the IP Enforcement Portal. 
The Italian system to define IPR type classifications does 
not match with that of DG TAXUD. For this reason, the 
Italian  data  ‘IPR  Type’  are  referred  to  in  the  IP 
Enforcement  Portal  as  ‘NOT  PROVIDED’,  with  the 
exception of COPYRIGHT. 
The  published  figures  on  detained  items  from  the 
Carabinieri refer to both counterfeit and pirated goods. 
The data provided by the Carabinieri do not indicate the 
ID numbers of specific cases. Therefore, each row has 
been taken as a unique case. 
The figures published on detained items from the Polizia 
di Stato refer to both counterfeit and pirated goods. 
The data provided by the Polizia di Stato do not indicate 
the  ID  numbers  of  specific  cases.  Therefore,  each  row 
has been taken as a unique case. 
The figures published on detained items from the Polizia 
Municipale refer to both counterfeit and pirated goods. 
Although  each  Italian  municipality  has  their  own  local 
police force, all the inland detentions carried out by them 
will be available in the IP Enforcement Portal under the 
general heading ‘POLIZIA MUNICIPALE’. 

Latvia 

Latvian State Police 

Lithuania 

State Patent Bureau  

Luxembourg 

Public Prosecutor’s office 

The  Latvian  State  police  do  not  report  item  values. 
Therefore,  the  item  value  used  for  the  total  detention 
estimation  (EUR)  is  the  value  used  in  the  yearly 
publication of DG TAXUD reports. 

The  Public  Prosecutor’s  office  does  not  report  item 
values.  Therefore,  the  item  value  used  for  the  total 
detention  estimation  (EUR)  is  the  value  used  in  the 
yearly publication of DG TAXUD reports. 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Malta 

Malta Police Force. Economic 
Crime Unit 

Netherlands 

Ministry of Finance. FIOD CT 
Midden 

Poland 

National Police 

Portugal 

National Industrial Property 
Institute 

Romania 

Romanian Police 

Slovakia 

Financial Directorate 

Slovenia 

Criminal Police Directorate. 
Sector for Economic Crime 

Spain 

United 
Kingdom 

Spanish Patent and Trade mark 
Office 

Police of Scotland 

Scotland Trading Standards 

According to the Dutch instruction for IPR fraud, in cases 
of  danger  to  the  public’s  health/safety,  large-scale 
indications  of  a  criminal  organisation 
trading  or 
recidivism, 
the 
the 
Netherlands can start a criminal investigation (including 
inland  seizures).  The  FIOD  (the  fiscal  information  and 
investigation  service  of  the  Dutch  Tax  and  Customs 
Administration)  and  the  police  are  the  investigative 
authorities in the Netherlands. 

investigative  authorities 

in 

The  Polish  National  police  do  not  report  item  values. 
Therefore,  the  item  value  used  for  the  total  detention 
estimation  (EUR)  is  the  value  used  in  the  yearly 
publication of DG TAXUD reports. 

Since  the  number  of  IPR  infringement  cases  is  not 
considered  problematic,  the  Slovenian  Police  do  not 
collect  separate  data  on  inland  cases  for  statistical 
purposes. 
However,  this  does  not  mean  that  the  number  of 
detentions in Slovenia is zero. 

Table A-1: EU national markets reporting enforcement authorities. 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Annex B. 

Availability, quantity and quality of data 

As described in section 3, the analysis of the overall detentions of goods infringing IP rights in the 

EU during 2019 is based on the data about these detentions recorded in the IP Enforcement Portal 

during 2020. 

B.1  EU BORDER DETENTIONS DATA 

Data on reported detentions at the EU border are directly and constantly loaded into COPIS by the 

EU customs authorities. 

For  the  analysis  of  the  overall  detentions,  data  on  detentions  at  the  EU  border  are  also  partially 

loaded into the IP Enforcement Portal on the basis of COPIS data. They are loaded yearly, in a one-

shot loading exercise. 

Records on reported detentions at EU Member State borders are available for 100 % of the Member 

States, both in COPIS and in the IP Enforcement Portal. 

However, as explained in section 3, neither all the records nor all the fields in COPIS concerning the 

detentions of goods infringing IP rights at the EU border are consistently stored in the IP Enforcement 

Portal. 

There  are  36 subcategories  used  to  describe  the  types  of  products  detained  at  the  EU  border, 

classified under 12 main categories, (see Table C-1 and Table C-2 in Annex C). 

B.2  EU INTERNAL MARKET DETENTIONS DATA 

Data on reported detentions in the EU internal market are loaded into the IP Enforcement Portal on 

the basis of the data reported by the different EU enforcement authorities referred to in Table A-1 of 

section A.2 in Annex A. They are fully loaded each year, but in different bulks of data, depending on 

the enforcement authority. These bulks consist in some cases of a main bulk with the majority of 

data for a year, plus one or more minor bulks afterwards. As a result, the picture of the detentions in 

41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

the  EU  internal  market  during  a  period  may  vary,  depending  on  the  precise  time  of  the  data 

download. 

The main constraints on the availability of 2019 detentions data reported, in particular, by the EU 

internal market’s enforcement authorities, were described in the EUIPO’s December  2020 report. 

Consequently, different degrees of availability of records on the 2018 and 2019 detentions for all EU 

Member  States’  national  markets  exist  in  the  IP  Enforcement  Portal,  as  shown  in  Table B-1 

below (33): 

(33) The percentage of availability of data includes the estimate of the percentage of volume of detentions made in the 

national market by the enforcement authorities of those Member States participating in the reporting exercise. For example, 

it is estimated that the number of detentions made by the United Kingdom enforcement authorities that participated in the 

exercise in 2018 and 2019 (the Police of Scotland) covers 13 % of total detentions in the United Kingdom national market, 

the remaining 87 % of detentions being performed by national market enforcement authorities that have never participated 

in the reporting exercise (England and Wales Trading Standards, the Police of Northern Ireland and the PIPCU) or that did 

not provide data in the 2018 and 2019 data collection exercises in particular (Scotland Trading Standards). 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Table B-1: Availability of records for EU internal market detentions per reporting EU Member State and year. 

It should, however, be highlighted that, in most of the cases where the availability of data decreased 

between 2018 and 2019, or where the 2019 data were not available at the moment of drafting the 

report, the lockdown imposed due to the COVID-19 pandemic seems to have been the main cause. 

Moreover, despite the IP Enforcement Portal being ready to accommodate fields informing about the 

itinerary used (country of origin; country of shipment; country, city and type of place of detention and 

country of destination), the means of transport used, and whether the products detained were made 

in the EU or not, most of this information was not provided by the EU internal market enforcement 

authorities in 2018 or 2019. This impedes the analysis of these dimensions in this overall report. 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

There  are  44 subcategories  used 

to  describe 

the 

types  of  products  detained  overall: 

36 corresponding to the goods detained at the EU border plus 8 additional ones (however, one of 

these is ‘16a – Not provided’). The subcategories are classified under the same 12 main categories 

in the classification used for goods detained at the EU border, plus another 4 main categories defined 

to accommodate the 8 additional subcategories previously mentioned. The additional categories and 

subcategories can be seen in Table D-1 and Table D-2 in Annex D. 

44 

 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Annex C. 

DG TAXUD classification of products for 

detentions at the EU border 

Table C-1: Upper-level DG TAXUD products classification. 

45 

Upper_Category01 Foodstuffs, alcoholic and other beverages02 Body care items03 Clothing and accessories04 Shoes including parts and accessories05 Personal accessories06 Mobile phones including parts and technical accessories07 Electrical/electronic and computer equipment08 CD, DVD, cassette, game cartridges09 Toys, games (including electronic game consoles) and sporting articles10 Tobacco products11 Medicines12 Other 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Table C-2: Lower-level DG TAXUD products classification (subcategories) (34). 

(34) The category short name ‘recorded CVs/DVDs’ refers to any kind of support for recording, in particular to USB sticks. 

46 

CategoryCategory Short Name1a  - foodstuffsFoodstuffs1b  - alcoholic beveragesAlcoholic beverages1c  - other beveragesOther beverages2a  - perfumes and cosmeticsPerfumes and cosmetics2b  - other body care itemsOther body care items3a  - clothing (ready to wear)Clothing3b  - clothing accessoriesClothing accessories4a  - sport shoesSport shoes4b  - other shoesNon-sport shoes5a  - sunglasses and other eye-glassesSunglasses5b  - bags including wallets; purses; cigarette cases and other similar goods carried in the pocket/bagBags, wallets, purses5c  - watchesWatches5d  - jewellery and other accessoriesJewellery6a  - mobile phonesMobile phones6b  - parts and technical accessories for mobile phonesMobile phone access.7a  - audio/video apparatus including technical accessories and partsAudio/video apparatus7b  - memory cards; memory sticksMemory cards/sticks7c  - ink cartridges and tonersInk cartridges7d  - computer equipment (hardware) including technical accessories and partsComputer equipment7e  - other equipment including technical accessories and partsOther electronics8a  - recorded (music; film; software; game software)Recorded CDs/DVDs8b  - unrecordedUnrecorded CDs/DVDs9a  - toysToys9b  - games (including electronic game consoles)Games9c  - sporting articles (including leisure articles)Sporting articles10a - cigarettesCigarettes10b - other tobacco productsOther tobacco11a - MedicinesMedicines12a - machines and toolsMachines/tools12b - vehicles including accessories and partsVehicle accessories12c - office stationeryOffice stationery12d - lightersLighters12e - labels; tags; stickersLabels, tags, stickers12f - textilesTextiles12g - packaging materialsPackaging material12h - otherOther goods 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Annex D. 

Additional classification of products for 

detentions in the EU internal market 

Table D-1: Additional upper-level products classification. 

Table D-2: Additional lower-level products classification (subcategories). 

47 

Upper_Category13 Furniture14 Construction materials and machinery15 Online counterfeit and pirate products16 Not ProvidedCategoryCategory Short Name13a - Private residence furnitureHome furniture13b - Office furnitureOffice furniture13c - Other furnitureOther furniture14a - Construction materialsConstruction materials14b - Construction machineryConstruction machinery15a - illegal streaming/downloadingIllegal 15b - Online - sale/offer of counterfeit productsOnline sale/offer of counterfeit products16a - not providedNot provided 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

Annex E.  Methodological notes for comparing detentions 

at the EU border with detentions in the EU internal market 

In order to analyse the differences between the types of subcategories of goods most detained in 

2019 at the EU border and in the EU internal market, the comparison is based on the share that the 

detentions of a certain type of products, i, represented, in terms of both number of items and value, 

as a fraction of the total detentions of all types of goods in that year. 

That share showed clear discrepancies between the type of products detained at the EU border and 

in the EU internal market in 2019. 

However, to make the comparison appropriate, it is important to choose a subset of Member States 

in which there is a solid availability of data on detentions both at the EU border and in their national 

markets. Since the data on detentions at the EU border in 2019 are available for all Member States 

(see section B.1 of Annex B), the solidity of the set of countries to be chosen is determined by the 

availability  of  data  on  detentions  in  Member  State  national  markets  in  2019  (see  Table B-1  in 

section B.2 of Annex B). On the basis of that availability, the analysis described hereafter has been 

restricted  to  all  the  EU  Member  States  in  2019  except  Austria,  Finland,  Germany, 

Luxembourg, Sweden and the United Kingdom (the selected subset). 

The share, in terms of quantity of items, of detentions in 2019 at the EU border of the goods of 

subcategory i for the selected subset is: 

(e.g. 𝑄𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑠

𝐸𝑈𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟 = 15.9%) 

𝑄𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖

𝐸𝑈𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟 

The  share,  in terms  of  quantity  of  items,  of  detentions  in  2019  in  the  EU  national  markets  of  the 

goods of subcategory i for the selected subset is: 

(e.g. 𝑄𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑠

𝐸𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑘 = 3.5%) 

𝑄𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖

𝐸𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑘 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

The delta between the share, in terms of quantity of items, at the EU border and the share in the EU 

national markets in 2019 is defined as the difference between the two, taking ‘at the EU border’ as 

the minuend: 

∆𝑄𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖 =  𝑄𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖

𝐸𝑈𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟 −  𝑄𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖

𝐸𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑘 

(e.g. ∆𝑄𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑠 = 15.9% − 3.5% = 12.4%) 

High positive values of ∆QSharei imply that the detentions of goods of subcategory i are, in 2019 and 

in the selected subset of Member States, proportionally much more voluminous, in terms of quantity 

of items, at the EU border than in the EU national markets, whereas high negative values of ∆QSharei 
imply  that  the  detentions  of  goods  of  subcategory  i  are,  in  2019  and  in  the  selected  subset, 

proportionally much more voluminous, in terms of quantity of items, in the EU national markets than 

at the EU border. 

Analogously, the share, in terms of estimated value, of detentions in 2019 at the EU border of the 

goods of subcategory i for the selected subset is: 

𝑉𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖

𝐸𝑈𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟 

(e.g. 𝑉𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔

𝐸𝑈𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟 = 24.5%) 

The share, in terms of estimated value, of detentions in 2019 in EU national markets of the goods of 

subcategory i for the selected subset is: 

𝑉𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖

𝐸𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑘 

(e.g. 𝑉𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔

𝐸𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑘 = 13.1%) 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 

OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 

The delta between the share, in terms of estimated value, at the EU border and in the EU national 

markets  in  2019  is  defined  as  the  difference  between  the  two,  taking  ‘at  the  EU  border’  as  the 

minuend: 

∆𝑉𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖 =  𝑉𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖

𝐸𝑈𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟 −  𝑉𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖

𝐸𝑈𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑘 

(e.g. ∆𝑉𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 24.5% − 13.1% = 11.4%) 

High positive values of ∆VSharei imply that the detentions of goods of subcategory i are, in 2019 and 

in  the  selected  subset  of  Member  States,  proportionally  much  more  voluminous,  in  terms  of 

estimated value, at the EU border than in the EU national markets, whereas high negative values of 

∆QSharei imply that the detentions of goods of subcategory i are, in 2019 and in the selected subset, 

proportionally much more voluminous, in terms of value, in the EU national markets than at the EU 

border. 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: 
OVERALL RESULTS OF DETENTIONS, 2019 

ISBN 978-92-9156-291-6  doi: 10.2814/474589   TB-02-21-480-EN-N 

© European Union Intellectual Property Office, 2021 
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged