A brand's product photos are usually its most copied asset. They appear on counterfeit listings, rival stores, and wholesale catalogues within days of a launch, because good photography is expensive and stealing it is free. Teams respond with watermarks, then discover the watermarks cropped out and the photos back in use.
The honest starting point is that prevention and proof are different jobs. Prevention raises the thief's effort a little. Proof, kept quietly and completely, is what wins takedowns and disputes. This guide covers both, in the order that actually matters.
Design files leak through suppliers, ex staff, and file sharing by partners far more than through hacking. Control means limiting who holds full files, watermarking copies per recipient, and splitting manufacturing information so no single outsider holds the whole product.
A strong takedown evidence pack contains proof you own the work, dated evidence of the infringing use, and the exact URLs, in one tidy bundle. Most rejected notices fail on gaps in that chain, not on the merits, so building the pack before you file saves a second round.
Ownership first: the original file with its creation data, an earlier publication on your own site or catalogue, and any registration or design record if you have one. Infringement second: screenshots of the listing or page showing the copied material, the seller identity, and the URL, captured with the date visible or recorded alongside. Identity third: who you are and your right to act, stated once, clearly.
Weak notices usually contain only the middle part. A screenshot of a copied photo with no proof it is yours asks the platform to take your word, and platforms faced with a counter claim will not. The pack exists so that no step in the chain needs your word at all.
Screenshot the full page, not a crop, and save the page itself where the platform allows, because listings change or vanish once a seller is notified. Note prices, sales counts, and reviews on the infringing listing: they matter later if the case moves beyond a simple takedown into compensation, and they cannot be reconstructed after removal.
Record dates in a simple log as you go: when you found it, when you filed, the case reference, and the outcome. Sellers who reappear under new names are common, and a log turns the second filing into a repeat offender case, which most platforms treat faster and more seriously than a first report.
Match the pack to the platform's form instead of pasting the whole bundle into a comment box. Put ownership proof where it asks for rights evidence, URLs in the URL fields, and keep a copy of exactly what you submitted. If a notice is rejected, the rejection reason plus your copy tells you which link in the chain to repair, rather than starting again from memory.
Keep a template pack for your catalogue: standard ownership documents, brand records, and authorised signatory details, refreshed when they change. Each new case then needs only the infringement evidence added, which cuts filing time from an afternoon to under an hour and makes routine enforcement actually happen.
Keep reading: Who we protect covers a nearby case in this series.
The usual reasons are missing ownership proof, URLs that do not show the material described, or a mismatch between the work claimed and the work shown. Read the rejection for which part failed and repair that link rather than refiling the identical pack.
A visible or reliably recorded date strengthens the evidence, especially for damages and repeat offender claims. Use full page captures, save the page source or an archive copy where possible, and log capture dates in your case notes at the time.
Then the quality of your chain decides the next step. With dated originals and a clear ownership record, you can respond or escalate with confidence. Without them, platforms often restore the listing and the dispute becomes far harder to win.
Most platforms accept multiple URLs for the same work and seller in one filing. Group by seller and by work, keep each claim matched to its evidence, and file separately where a different owner or a different work is involved.