Amazon: Opportunity and legal risk in one platform
For many businesses, Amazon is both a key sales channel and a legal minefield. The platform’s reach is unparalleled — yet with that scale comes exposure to imitation, trademark misuse, and unfair competition by third-party sellers.
Repeatedly, brands encounter counterfeit or misleading listings that mimic their products and divert sales. The result is not only loss of revenue but also erosion of brand reputation and consumer trust.
A recurring question for affected companies is: when does Amazon itself bear legal responsibility for such infringements?
Typical forms of trademark infringement on Amazon
Trademark and brand violations occur on Amazon every day, often in recurring patterns:
- Counterfeits: Third-party sellers offer imitations using identical or confusingly similar brand names. Consumers are misled into buying the cheaper “alternative”, causing revenue loss and reputational damage for the genuine brand.
- Hijacking existing listings: Unauthorized sellers attach themselves to genuine branded listings under the same ASIN (Amazon Standard Identification Number). Because Amazon allows multiple sellers per listing, inferior goods can appear under a legitimate trademark. The result is that a third-party seller not only offers a different—potentially inferior—product under your brand, but your own product also loses value and credibility. And if negative reviews appear, they will directly impact your brand image.
- Unauthorized use of trademarks: Protected brand names are often inserted into product titles, descriptions, or keywords without consent, creating the false impression of association with the genuine brand.
- Misleading Amazon suggestions: Even automated features such as “similar product” recommendations or search filters can contain trademark violations when they incorrectly link products to a protected brand.
When can Amazon itself be held liable?
Amazon acts in two main capacities — and its legal responsibility differs depending on which role it plays.
Amazon as a direct seller
When Amazon sells goods in its own name — for example, under the label “Sold by Amazon” or through its own brands — it assumes full responsibility for any trademark violations linked to those sales. This principle was confirmed in the CJEU’s Louboutin decision (C-148/21 and C-184/21, 22 December 2022). The case concerned the sale, via Amazon’s platform, of shoes with the characteristic red sole — a registered Louboutin trademark — by third-party sellers. Although Amazon had not sold the goods itself, the CJEU held that Amazon is directly liable. The reason was that users could not clearly recognise that the products originated from third parties. According to the Court, this is the case when Amazon presents its own products and third-party offers in a uniform manner and displays its own logo. For consumers, this presentation creates the impression that the offers come from Amazon itself — and that very circumstance leads to Amazon’s own legal responsibility.
Amazon as a platform operator
When Amazon merely hosts offers from independent merchants, it generally acts as an intermediary. However, once the company becomes aware of an infringement and fails to act, it can be held liable under “interferer’s liability” (Störerhaftung in German law).
A key illustration comes from the OLG Frankfurt decision of 21 December 2023 (6 U 154/22) involving plant-based products marketed as “soy milk” or “oat milk”. Such designations violate EU food law, which reserves the term “milk” for animal-based products. Once notified of these violations, Amazon was required not only to remove the listings but also to take active measures to prevent future similar infringements. The court held that Amazon bears legal responsibility as a marketplace operator once specific violations are reported and ignored.
Amazon and the Digital Services Act (DSA)
Since August 2023, the Digital Services Act (DSA) has applied to major online platforms such as Amazon. The DSA imposes binding obligations on these platforms to ensure greater transparency and faster action against illegal content.
Under the DSA, Amazon must in particular:
Provide reporting channels for illegal content (Art. 16 DSA):
Amazon must offer a system that allows users and rights holders to report illegal content quickly and easily. These reporting mechanisms must be accessible, clearly structured, and user-friendly. The goal is to ensure that affected parties can flag legal infringements without unnecessary barriers.
Act promptly on valid notices (Art. 17 DSA):
Once Amazon has been notified of an infringement, it is obliged to assess the report without undue delay and — where the notice is justified — to remove or block access to the infringing content. This provision is designed to guarantee a swift review and reaction by the platform.
Publish transparency reports (Art. 42 DSA):
Amazon must regularly inform the public and competent authorities — including the Federal Office of Justice (Bundesamt für Justiz) in Germany, acting as the Digital Services Coordinator (DSC), and the European Commission as the authority for very large online platforms (VLOPs) — about the number of reports received and removals carried out, as well as the measures taken against illegal content.
And in case of non-compliance?
Failure to comply with these obligations can lead to EU-level enforcement and significant fines under Article 52 DSA.
In practice, this framework strengthens the position of rights holders: once an infringement is reported, Amazon is under a legal duty to act swiftly and systematically prevent recurrence.
Recent case law: how courts have addressed trademark infringements involving Amazon
Beyond the Louboutin matter (CJEU, 22 December 2022, C-148/21 and C-184/21) and the plant-based “milk” case (OLG Frankfurt, 21 December 2023, 6 U 154/22), several further decisions have held Amazon to account:
BGH (Federal Court of Justice), 25.07.2019, I ZR 29/18 — Ortlieb II
Amazon had placed Google Ads containing protected trademarks such as “Ortlieb”, while the linked landing pages did not lead exclusively to Ortlieb products. The BGH held Amazon liable for misleading advertising and prohibited the use of a trademark in search ads where the ad presentation suggests an origin or selection that the landing page does not deliver. In practice, if a trademark is used in an ad, the post-click environment must correspond to that expectation; otherwise, the ad is deceptive and unlawful.
A third-party seller had used a manufacturer’s product photos on Amazon without permission. The court found Amazon responsible for copyright infringement because the platform also used the photos in its own offers/presentations. Amazon was ordered to cease and desist and to pay damages. The ruling underscores that Amazon may be directly exposed where infringing assets (e.g., images) are taken up into Amazon’s own content environment, beyond merely hosting third-party listings.
LG Munich I, 20.02.2019, 37 O 5140/18
What brand owners can do
Register your brand with Amazon Brand Registry
If your trademark is officially registered, Amazon’s Brand Registry allows you to link it to your seller account. This facilitates quicker handling of infringement complaints and more effective monitoring of unauthorized listings.
Report violations via Amazon’s notice-and-takedown system
Amazon offers structured forms for reporting IP infringements. When properly documented, such notices can result in rapid removal of infringing listings.
Secure and preserve evidence
All infringements should be meticulously documented — including screenshots, visible URLs, timestamps, and communication records. This evidence is crucial for legal enforcement and claim substantiation.
Request delisting and blocking of infringing offers
A lawyer’s formal notice to Amazon can help ensure that infringing listings are removed promptly and that preventive measures are implemented for similar future cases.
Cease-and-desist and preliminary injunctions
If infringements persist or immediate harm is likely, a cease-and-desist letter followed by an interim injunction can provide rapid relief. Deadlines are typically short (around one month from knowledge of the violation), so swift action through specialized counsel is advisable.
Conclusion: Amazon’s liability and your brand protection
Amazon is no longer shielded by its intermediary status. With the CJEU’s and German courts’ evolving case law — and now under the Digital Services Act — the platform can be held liable not only for its own conduct but also for failure to remove infringing third-party offers.
For brand owners, this opens stronger legal avenues to protect trademarks, prevent counterfeit sales, and enforce fair marketplace practices.
Effective brand protection on Amazon requires a combination of trademark registration, active monitoring, and well-structured enforcement supported by legal expertise.
Our legal services for brand protection on Amazon
As lawyers specialised in intellectual property and unfair competition law, we understand how vital brand protection is for commercial success, particularly on global marketplaces like Amazon.
If you or your company are affected — for example, because:
- your trademark is used without consent in Amazon listings, product titles or ads;
- other sellers attach to your ASIN and offer inferior goods under your brand; or
- your registered mark is misused by competitors or platform algorithms —
we can assess your legal position and take swift, targeted action to stop the violations. Our support includes drafting and sending cease-and-desist letters, enforcing removal and injunctions, and litigating trademark claims before German courts when necessary.
We also advise sellers who have received infringement notices or takedown requests, ensuring that claims are properly reviewed and that unjustified accusations are firmly contested.
For strategic brand protection and clear guidance on Amazon enforcement, contact our IP and competition law team at info@abd.legal or by phone at +49 176 83 774 098.
Consultations are available in English, German, and Polish.