Before sending a China e-commerce intellectual property takedown notice, preserve the listing and build a written evidence pack that identifies the right, the rights holder, the exact product or service, the preliminary basis for infringement, and the truth guarantee. For patent complaints, be ready to add a claim-feature or design-feature comparison and, if requested, an evaluation report for a utility model or design patent. A strong pack helps the platform locate the target, assess the complaint, and preserve options if the seller files a counter-notice.
This guide covers the notice-and-counter-notice framework under China’s E-Commerce Law and Supreme People’s Court guidance. It is designed for overseas brands, creators, in-house teams, and coordinating counsel. Official sources were verified on September 14, 2026.
What should a China platform takedown evidence pack contain?
The Supreme People’s Court guidance on e-commerce platform IP cases says a notice generally includes four elements: proof of the intellectual property right and the rights holder’s true identity; information that accurately locates the accused product or service; preliminary evidence of infringement; and a written guarantee that the notice is truthful. The notice should be in writing.
Turn those legal elements into a working file with six sections:
Authority to act. Include the rights holder’s identity, the complainant’s identity, and any assignment, license, agency, or authorization needed to connect the complainant to the right.
Right being asserted. Identify the China trademark, copyright, patent, or other right by registration or application details and current status. Do not rely on a certificate if a transfer, name change, expiration, invalidation, or license affects the record.
Exact target locator. Record the platform, shop and seller name, product or service title, listing ID, URL, variants, and any recurring or mirror listings. A generic storefront screenshot may not identify the accused item precisely enough.
Preserved marketplace record. Save dated captures of the full listing, product images, description, seller profile, price, sales indicators, reviews relevant to the claim, and the URL or listing ID shown with the capture.
Right-to-listing comparison. Explain where the protected sign, work, claim feature, or design feature appears in the target. Use a short, accurate comparison tied to the legal scope of the asserted right.
Requested measure and truth guarantee. State the links and action requested, sign the required declaration, and keep a copy of everything submitted and every platform response.
This is an operating checklist. The evidence required and the measure that is proportionate depend on the right, the product, the platform rules, and the facts.
Preserve the listing before you press submit
Capture the evidence first because a listing can change, move, or disappear after the seller learns of a complaint. At minimum, preserve the URL or listing ID, the shop and seller identifiers, the visible product page, the relevant images and text, and the date and method of capture. Keep the original files and a simple evidence index that explains where each item came from.
A screenshot can be useful, but it does not automatically prove every fact that matters. If authenticity, sales, product configuration, or the seller’s identity may become disputed, consider whether a lawful test purchase, invoice, packaging, delivery record, platform data, notarization, or court evidence-preservation measure is appropriate. Article 7 of the Supreme People’s Court provisions on evidence in IP civil litigation confirms that physical items and receipts obtained through an ordinary test purchase can serve as evidence, subject to the facts of the case. The same provisions direct courts to consider whether evidence may be lost or become difficult to obtain when reviewing preservation requests.
Do not collect more data than the matter requires. Keep a clean chain between the source, capture date, file name, translator if any, and the legal point the item is intended to support.
Trademark, copyright, and patent complaints need different comparisons
A platform notice is not stronger merely because it contains more pages. It is stronger when the proof matches the right asserted.
For a trademark complaint, identify the current China registration and the covered goods or services. Show the accused sign as used on the product, packaging, title, store page, or advertising, and explain the relevant similarity and commercial context. Ownership and authorization documents should use consistent entity names.
For a copyright complaint, show authorship or ownership and the chain of title when the complainant is not the original creator. Preserve the original work, dated creation or publication records, the accused material, and a side-by-side comparison of the protectable expression. A registration certificate can help, but the complete ownership and copying analysis still depends on the facts.
For a patent complaint, identify the patent and current status, then map the accused product to the asserted claim features or design features. The Supreme People’s Court guidance states that a platform may request a technical-feature or design-feature comparison and may request a patent evaluation report for a utility model or design patent. Avoid conclusory labels such as “identical” without a traceable comparison. If the platform is not a suitable forum for the technical dispute, assess administrative action, litigation, or preservation with China counsel.
What happens after the notice?
Under Articles 42 and 43 of the E-Commerce Law of the People’s Republic of China, a rights holder may notify a platform and request necessary measures such as deletion, blocking, disconnection of a link, or termination of transactions and services. The platform forwards the notice to the platform operator and takes measures based on the preliminary evidence and service type.
The seller may submit a statement of non-infringement with preliminary evidence. The platform then forwards that statement to the rights holder and advises that a complaint may be made to the relevant authority or a lawsuit filed. If the platform does not receive notice that the rights holder has complained or sued within 15 days after the forwarded statement reaches the rights holder, Article 43 says it should promptly terminate the measures.
That 15-day period does not begin when the seller privately drafts a response or when the rights holder first submits the takedown. Record when the forwarded statement actually reaches the rights holder, identify the competent next forum, and calculate the response plan against the actual case. The Supreme People’s Court’s reply on online IP infringement disputes also addresses special delays outside a rights holder’s control and judicial review of urgent preservation requests. Case-specific advice is important where timing is contested.
A platform decision is one part of the enforcement strategy
Platform action can stop or reduce visibility of a listing, but it does not necessarily establish infringement, identify the full supply chain, secure compensation, or stop the same seller elsewhere. Use the takedown process as one part of a wider decision:
Platform-only action may fit a clear, contained listing where the immediate goal is to interrupt sales and the available evidence is sufficient for the platform.
Administrative enforcement may be considered when on-site investigation, seizure, penalties, or action against offline conduct is relevant and the competent authority can be identified.
Civil litigation may be considered when an injunction, damages, discovery of the commercial chain, or a binding adjudication is important.
Customs or portfolio measures may be relevant when the same goods cross the border or reveal a gap in China trademark, copyright, or patent coverage.
The next step depends on the right, urgency, evidence quality, seller identity, repeat conduct, business impact, budget, and expected decision timeline. Our China IP enforcement service explains how platform, administrative, and court routes can be coordinated. For disputes where damages may matter, see our guide to China IP punitive damages.
Wrong and malicious notices create risk
Article 42 of the E-Commerce Law states that a rights holder that causes damage through an erroneous notice bears civil liability, and a party that maliciously sends an erroneous notice and causes damage bears double compensation liability. A weak complaint is not automatically malicious. The Supreme People’s Court guidance lists factors courts may consider, including forged or altered rights evidence, false infringement comparisons, knowingly relying on an unstable right, failing to withdraw or correct a known error, and repeatedly submitting erroneous notices.
Before filing, verify the right’s status, confirm the target, test the comparison, and remove claims the evidence does not support. After filing, monitor changes in ownership, validity, product configuration, and the seller’s response. Correct the record promptly if a material fact changes.
Four practical questions
Does a China registration guarantee a takedown?
No. A registration helps establish the asserted right, but the platform still evaluates the notice, preliminary infringement evidence, product or service, and its rules. The seller may also submit a non-infringement statement.
Are screenshots enough?
Sometimes they may support a clear platform complaint, but they may not prove authenticity, transaction history, the physical product, seller identity, or damages. Preserve source and timing, then match the method to the likely next dispute.
Can a platform ask for additional documents?
Yes. The Supreme People’s Court guidance allows platforms to develop implementation measures by right type and product or service, while stating that those measures should not create unreasonable conditions or barriers to lawful enforcement. Patent notices may receive more technical requests.
What should be ready if a counter-notice arrives?
Keep the original submission, proof of delivery, the forwarded statement, the exact time it was received, the right-status check, and a decision path for administrative complaint or litigation. Do not wait for the counter-notice to identify local counsel or the evidence gap.
Prepare a scoped China e-commerce enforcement inquiry
For an initial scope review, share the platform and listing IDs or URLs, the China rights being asserted, the rights holder and seller or shop names, the preserved evidence already available, the immediate business impact, the requested outcome, the budget range, and the expected decision timeline. For a patent matter, do not send complete unpublished technical details before conflict checks and a confidentiality plan are in place.
Overseas law firms and IP agencies can also coordinate multi-listing or multi-client instructions through our China foreign-associate service.
This article provides general information, not legal advice about infringement, evidence sufficiency, platform procedure, or a particular deadline. Platform rules and case facts must be checked for the specific matter. A notice or enforcement filing does not guarantee removal, liability, compensation, or any other outcome.