Abstract For the past decades, counterfeiting has severely threatened trade. It not only led to tremendous loss for businesses, but also created problems such as harm to public health and other crime related activities. China has been accused by its main trading partners as being the biggest counterfeit source for a long time. Both China and EU have already put a lot of effort on containment of counterfeiting and have achieved some remarkable progress. This study provides the reader with comprehensive information on the EU and Chinese legal system regarding elaborates the legal basis of different types of cases in right holders’ practice, thereby reveal the resources of successful enforcement and enlighten the possibility of future cooperation. For this purpose, the term counterfeit per se will be clarified, then through perspectives of general anti-counterfeiting structures and judicial systems. Then three types of anti-counterfeit cases combined with practical details and specific legislations are scrutinized. The end of the thesis provides the conclusion as well as an executive summary. counterfeiting,
manufacturing without authority or selling or manufacturing without authority other's registered trademarks or identifications’. Article 60 of Trademark law stipulates the trademark dispute resolution, which empowers AIC the right to handle infringement cases. If the parties are reluctant to resolve the dispute through negotiation or the negotiation fails, the trademark registrant or an interested party may institute an action in a people's court or request the administrative department for industry and commerce to handle the dispute. Article 61 and 62 are about AIC’s powers and duties of conducting administrative protection. Meanwhile, AIC is authorized to issue law ie administrative regulations, within its administrative power. Therefore recent years witnessed the issuance of the Administrative Measures for the Printing and Production of Trademarks and Provisional Measures on the Recognition and Administrative Control of Well-known Trademarks issued by AIC. Besides these, AIC and its Trademark Office also formulated normative rules in order to solve those problems which did not clarify in Trademark Law but emerged during the implementation. These two authorities at the same time formulated interim provisions with MPS on cooperation in criminal cases. Customs also closely cooperated with MPS on criminal cases under the Tentative Regulation stipulates of Strengthen the Enforcement of Law on IPR. 5.3 Web-monitoring Case Besides Customs control and local intelligence investigation, web-monitoring goes one step further as a proactive countermeasures. Since nowadays selling from internet has become major enablers for the distribution and sale of counterfeit goods. Counterfeiters are able to function across multiple jurisdictions, evading capture, and are also able to take down and set up new websites overnight without losing their customer base. Consumers are drawn to e-commerce sites because they are available 24/7 and items are delivered directly to consumers’ homes. Right holders usually do web-monitoring searching on auction sites, e-commerce platform and direct sites in a regular bases. If any searching result matches their criterial as suspicious site, a test purchasing will be conducted for further identification of suspicious goods. Once the result indicates counterfeit, the following approaches are adopted for online trademark infringement: Sending cease and desist letter and warning letter to direct infringer; Domain arbitration;