EN PL
Misleading Invoices in EUIPO Proceedings: Identification, Legal Responses, and Best Practices for Combating Fraudulent Tactics
 
Więcej
Ukryj
1
Department of Intellectual Property Law, University of Bialystok, Faculty of Law, Poland
 
 
Data nadesłania: 15-12-2025
 
 
Data akceptacji: 20-12-2025
 
 
Data publikacji: 23-12-2025
 
 
Autor do korespondencji
Magdalena Rutkowska-Sowa   

Department of Intellectual Property Law, University of Bialystok, Faculty of Law, Białystok, Poland
 
 
Cybersecurity and Law 2025;14(2):293-303
 
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
DZIEDZINY
STRESZCZENIE
Objectives:
The author highlights the tactics used in fraudulent invoicing schemes targeting applicants and proprietors of EU trademarks, explores methods for identifying such practices, assesses available legal responses, and discusses best practices for combating these deceptive actions. It is estimated that fraudsters request an average fee of EUR 1,500, with annual profits from these fraudulent activities exceeding EUR 26 million. Due to the perpetrators' adaptability, the problem is considered nearly unstoppable. Until now, this issue has not been the subject of significant doctrinal commentary.

Methods:
The above-mentioned issue was examined on the basis of an analysis of the relevant literature, online publications, and press sources, with the primary reference being the EUROPOL, Misleading payment request fraud targeting intellectual property right owners: 2024 situation report (Public report) (2025, May 16).

Results:
Analysis indicates that fraudulent activity continues to increase, with scammers frequently modifying their schemes, including the introduction of new email templates, fictitious offices, and pseudo-services such as publication registers, monitoring, or protection. The data further show that perpetrators are increasingly successful in impersonating official bodies through email spoofing, phishing, and the use of counterfeit certificates, logos, and names closely resembling legitimate authorities. These schemes are characterised by high profitability and low risk.

Conclusions:
The problem has persisted for over a decade, with enforcement struggling to match the speed of perpetrators’ adaptations. Long-term solutions will require close cooperation between IP offices, professional representatives, law enforcement, and business organizations, alongside broad dissemination of information on fraudulent practices to reduce their credibility.
ISSN:2658-1493
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top