What good is removing a counterfeit listing if the seller is already preparing the next one?

For Goodai Global, the company behind Beauty of Joseon, this was the frustrating reality of online counterfeiting. Individual takedowns couldn’t address the sellers and networks responsible for keeping fake products in circulation.

The company needed a different strategy: stop chasing listings and start investigating the people behind them.

Its work with Corsearch reveals how intelligence-led enforcement can change the way brands tackle counterfeiting. This case study takes a closer look.

How Did Goodai Global Move Beyond Counterfeit Listing Takedowns?

Goodai Global moved from manual, listing-by-listing enforcement towards a strategy built around seller intelligence, investigations, and targeted offline action. The change helped the company identify suspected high-volume sellers, support enforcement activity in China, and make more informed decisions about where to allocate its brand protection budget.

Beauty of Joseon operates in the skincare market, where counterfeit products create risks beyond lost sales. Since skincare products are applied directly to the skin, authenticity also has a consumer safety dimension.

According to the Corsearch case study featuring Goodai Global , the company had previously relied on a local vendor for basic online monitoring and manual takedowns. Although individual listings could be removed, the approach did not provide enough intelligence about the sellers behind them.

The problem was not simply that counterfeit listings kept appearing. It was that removing a listing did not necessarily disrupt the operation responsible for it.

Why Were Manual Counterfeit Takedowns Not Enough?

Manual takedowns addressed visible listings, but they did not give Goodai Global Inc. a clear picture of the wider counterfeit operation. The company needed to understand who was selling the products, where the activity originated, and how suspected sellers might be connected.

The earlier approach was a recurring cycle of identifying and reporting individual listings. This created a substantial manual workload without necessarily revealing the source of the problem.

What Did Corsearch Add to Goodai Global’s Enforcement Strategy?

Corsearch introduced automated counterfeit detection and removal alongside deeper investigations into suspected sellers. Its work included a Landscape Report and intelligence intended to help Goodai move beyond individual marketplace listings.

The most significant contribution was the additional visibility into suspected high-volume sellers.

According to the Corsearch case study, more than 80% of the targets identified by Corsearch matched heavy sellers that Goodai Global already suspected on Amazon and Alibaba.

This investigation helped validate existing concerns while adding personal information and supporting evidence that Goodai Global could use to pursue further action against the targets.

What Happened When Goodai Global Took the Investigation Offline?

The intelligence gathered through Corsearch helped Goodai support an offline enforcement action in China. The company instructed a local agency to conduct an on-site visit targeting a major counterfeit seller.

The action resulted in administrative enforcement and the physical seizure and destruction of more than 100 units of counterfeit Beauty of Joseon stock, according to the Corsearch case study.

The response went beyond removing online listings. It addressed physical counterfeit inventory connected to a major target.

How Did Seller Intelligence Support the China Enforcement Action?

The investigation gave Goodai Global a more targeted basis for directing its local enforcement resources. Instead of relying only on online reports, the company could use the intelligence gathered to support an on-site action against a suspected major seller.

The reported outcome illustrates how online investigations can inform offline enforcement. However, it is important to distinguish the stages: identifying a suspected seller, gathering supporting evidence, and carrying out an administrative enforcement action are separate steps.

The case study reports the seizure and destruction of over 100 counterfeit units. It does not establish that every suspected seller was prosecuted or that all counterfeit activity was eliminated.

How Did Investigations Help Goodai Global Avoid Unnecessary Spending?

Corsearch’s investigations also helped Goodai make a more informed decision about market expansion. When the company considered committing a substantial local enforcement budget to a new region, rapid investigation and reporting indicated that counterfeit products were not yet widespread there.

That finding helped Goodai Global Inc. avoid committing significant resources prematurely and allocate its budget elsewhere.

What Does This Tell Us About Brand Protection Budgets?

Enforcement budgets should reflect the available evidence about the scale, location, and nature of the threat. A market that appears risky at first glance may not require the same level of intervention as a market with established counterfeit activity.

Corsearch case study shows how investigation findings informed Goodai’s resource allocation. It helped Goodai Global secure an increased internal budget for offline enforcement and plan customs training programmes for the following year.

What Can Other Brands Learn From the Beauty of Joseon Case?

The central lesson is that effective brand protection requires more than removing counterfeit listings. Businesses need a process that connects monitoring, investigation, evidence gathering, and enforcement decisions.

Goodai Global’s experience offers four practical lessons for companies dealing with counterfeit products.

1. Why Should Brands Investigate Repeat Sellers Instead of Only Removing Listings?

Repeated listings may point to a seller or operation that needs closer investigation. Tracking repeat activity can help brands identify patterns that individual takedown requests may overlook.

2. Why Does Evidence Matter Beyond Detection?

Identifying a suspicious listing is not the same as establishing who is responsible. Investigations can provide additional information and supporting evidence that may help a brand pursue appropriate enforcement action.

3. Why Should Online and Offline Enforcement Work Together?

Online listings may be connected to physical stock, sellers, and distribution activity. Where the evidence supports it, coordinating digital investigations with local agencies and relevant authorities can help address more than the visible online presence.

4. Why Should IP Teams Use Intelligence to Guide Spending?

Not every market presents the same level of risk. Investigation findings can help businesses prioritize high-risk locations, avoid premature spending, and explain why additional enforcement resources are needed.

For companies developing a broader strategy, Emanus also explains the role of ongoing monitoring in its guide to trademark monitoring.

What Did Goodai Global Say About Its New Enforcement Approach?

Goodai Global Inc.’s IP Manager, Gyucheol, described the value of moving towards intelligence-led enforcement:

“Intelligence-led enforcement allows us to see the forest, not just the trees. We’ve moved beyond simple ‘whack-a-mole’ takedowns to identify and take action against the real targets.”

The quote captures the central change in the case: the objective was no longer limited to removing visible counterfeit listings. It was to understand the wider activity and identify targets for more focused action.

According to the Corsearch case study, Goodai Global planned to expand its enforcement scope into high-risk markets, including Southeast Asia, India, and Russia, while continuing its work with Corsearch’s investigations team.

Common Questions 

1. Why are counterfeit product listings difficult to eliminate?

Removing a listing does not necessarily stop the seller responsible for it. Sellers may continue operating through other accounts or listings, which is why identifying repeat sellers and investigating their activity can be important.

2. What is the difference between counterfeit monitoring and counterfeit investigation?

Monitoring helps identify suspicious listings, products, or activity. Investigation goes further by gathering information about suspected sellers, their operations, and possible connections. The findings can help a brand decide what further action may be appropriate.

3. Can online counterfeit investigations lead to offline enforcement?

They can help support offline action when investigations produce relevant information and evidence. In Goodai Global’s case, intelligence gathered through Corsearch supported an on-site action in China that resulted in the seizure and destruction of more than 100 counterfeit units.

4. How should a business decide where to spend its brand protection budget?

Businesses should assess the available evidence, the scale of suspected activity, the markets involved, and the potential impact on the brand and its customers. Goodai Global’s experience shows how investigation reports can help identify where enforcement resources are justified and where significant spending may be premature.

Summary 

Goodai Global’s experience demonstrates why counterfeit enforcement should not stop at the first takedown. A stronger approach connects monitoring with seller investigations, evidence gathering, jurisdiction-specific enforcement, and informed resource allocation.

For businesses, the starting point is to assess whether their current IP protection process can identify repeat activity, distinguish isolated incidents from wider operations, and guide decisions about what to do next.

At Emanus, we help businesses assess, protect, and strategically manage their intellectual property. If your brand is facing imitation, unauthorized use, or potential counterfeit activity, review your current protection strategy before committing resources to enforcement that may only address the visible symptoms.

Explore Emanus’s intellectual property services or schedule a consultation.