IACC participated in the 2025 USA-IT National Summit, held December 2–3. On December 2, Travis Johnson, IACC’s Vice President of Legislative Affairs & Senior Counsel, accepted the USA-IT Partnership Award on behalf of the organization and also contributed his insights as a panelist during the “Legislative Pathways Toward IP Security” session.
IACC Congratulates Raymond Tierney on Reelection as New York Suffolk County District Attorney
The IACC proudly congratulates Raymond Tierney on his reelection as District Attorney of Suffolk County, New York. DA Tierney has been a valued and trusted partner in the fight against intellectual property crime, working closely with the IACC to advance law enforcement training, share expertise at IACC conferences, and support brands in pursuing IP enforcement actions. Just last year, his office carried out a counterfeiting case and took action against a couple possessing and selling counterfeit merchandise valued at over $1million.
IACC President Bob Barchiesi attended DA Tierney’s swearing-in ceremony on January 23, 2026. We look forward to building on our partnership and continuing our collaborative efforts with DA Tierney and his team throughout his new term.
What’s the most common misconception about IP enforcement, and how does it impact companies/consumers?
The biggest misconception is that IP enforcement is purely reactive: something you do after damage has already occurred. In reality, modern brand protection is about prevention. When brands only chase infringements, bad actors stay ahead, consumers remain exposed, and costs escalate. This reactive mindset leads to fragmented enforcement, inconsistent consumer experiences, and increased risk. Proactive strategies – like blocking misuse before it happens – reduce harm, protect customers earlier in the funnel, and significantly lower long-term enforcement spend.
What new tactics are bad actors using to evade enforcement and what impact does it have on brand protection.
Bad actors are increasingly using short-lived domains, disposable storefronts, social-first selling, and layered redirects to stay ahead of takedowns. They also rotate keywords, product imagery, and brand references to avoid detection. This makes traditional reactive enforcement slower and more expensive, while consumer exposure increases. The result is higher operational burden for brands and greater risk to customers. It’s pushing leading companies to adopt proactive blocking and upstream controls instead of chasing abuse downstream.
What hobbies or causes are you passionate about?
I’m deeply passionate about music (and the arts in general). I love seeing live music and supporting the artists that create it whenever I can, any way I can. I also love pickleball, to which I’m now properly addicted.
How has online shopping through social media platforms impacted efforts to protect IP, and what strategies are companies adopting to address these challenges?
Counterfeits sold through social media platforms have increased the online visibility of fakes, thus (apparently) multiplying the number of infringers. Many online sellers have numerous accounts so, in addition to working with service providers offering “whack-a-mole” takedown solutions, brands are partnering with companies that are locally based and can dig deeper. These partners will assess the seriousness of the problem and work with local police to uncover who is behind some of these online sales. The strategy is to develop online-to-offline (“OTO”) programs with companies that can work with local police and its technical investigative capabilities.
What new tactics are bad actors using to evade enforcement and what impact does it have on brand protection.
On one hand you have new tactics used by counterfeiters, for example manufacturers shifting from producing large quantities of goods in advance to “made-to-order” production or assemblers relocating to areas where authorities are less knowledgeable. On the other hand, you have current socio-economic pressures, for example the hesitation that authorities have in carrying out raids against companies (versus individuals) or difficulties in doing cross-city investigations and raids. This makes enforcement against the source of counterfeits more difficult, and we must adapt the strategy to the specific on-the-ground situation.
Who has influenced you most when it comes to how you approach your work?
My father is the person who influenced me most when it comes to work as he started STU in 1984, when we (in Asia) were at the very beginning of IP enforcement. At that time, there were very few companies doing this type of work. With the support of a few very well-known brands, he started building connections with authorities and hired investigators and informants. We have expanded STU’s geographical and clients’ industry coverage since then. My father taught me to be agile in the ever-changing counterfeiters’ world and to think out of the box whilst proposing tailor-made solutions!
New Brand Protection Study by
Michigan State University
Brand Protection and Counterfeit Products: An Examination of Resourcing
by David Shepherd, Ph.D., Jeremy Wilson, Ph.D., and Tiana Gaudette
In their study recently published open access in the Journal of Economic Criminology, scholars from the Michigan State University School of Criminal Justice and the University of Portsmouth School of Criminology and Criminal Justice explore a critical area of concern among those involved in brand protection efforts: resourcing for product counterfeit investigations. The authors conducted a series of interviews with brand protection practitioners representing 35 multinational firms from major industries ranging from pharmaceuticals, apparel and footwear, consumer products, automotive, electronics/communication devices, and agriculture and veterinary products. Interviewees were asked how their companies resource their brand protection programs, differentiating internal and external costs, with a focus on counterfeit investigations. The findings offer valuable insights for those who administer brand protection programs and anti-counterfeit investigations.
Ad opportunities in our newsletters are available and are limited to IACC members. Bulk pricing available. Contact Dawn Sgarlata at dsgarlata@iacc.org.
TOOLS, RESOURCES & INFORMATION
IP Resources from Our Members
We are excited to include this Resource Section in our Quarterly Newsletter where we share interesting insights, research studies, white papers and other thought pieces from our members around the world. Members interested in submitting relevant material for our next newsletter should contact Dawn Sgarlata at dsgarlata@iacc.org.
Disclaimer: The IACC is providing these links as a courtesy to our members; the IACC has not independently verified any claims or assertions contained therein. Further, the views expressed in each of the linked resources are those of the respective authors, and their inclusion should not be interpreted as an endorsement by the IACC.
This guide outlines a comprehensive approach to combating illicit trade through robust intellectual property registration and strategic security measures. It provides brand owners with actionable steps to integrate digital authentication into their supply chains to protect product integrity and maintain consumer trust.
We examine the rising public health risks from counterfeit health and beauty products sold online, the role of new technologies in this threat, and the multi-layered enforcement strategies needed to protect consumers.
The Weaponization of QR-Codes and the Impact on Brand Protection report highlights the recent Google Threat Intelligence data showing that Russia's GRU has weaponized QR-Codes to gain access to systems, data and devices and how this threat is spreading around the world impacting brand protection efforts utilizing QR-Codes.
.jpg?upscale=true&width=1120&upscale=true&name=Securing%20Industry%20Ad%20-%20Q3%20Newsletter%202024%20(2).jpg)
