EU fines AliExpress €550 million over illegal product risks - EUIPO refuses Rosalía’s LUX trade mark for lack of distinctive character

EU fines AliExpress €550 million over illegal product risks

In March 2024, the European Commission opened formal proceedings against the Chinese online marketplace AliExpress regarding its compliance with the Digital Services Act (DSA). The investigation examined the management of illegal products, content moderation, advertising, recommender systems, and trader traceability. In June 2025, the Commission accepted commitments relating to seller verification, hidden links used to promote illegal products, advertising transparency, complaint mechanisms, and researchers' access to data. This brought part of the investigation to a close. However, the Commission continued to assess whether AliExpress had adequately evaluated and mitigated the broader risks associated with illegal products.

The Commission has concluded that the platform failed to comply with its risk assessment and mitigation obligations under the Digital Services Act (DSA) and has imposed a fine of €550 million, the largest penalty issued under the Act to date. According to the decision, AliExpress did not adequately assess the risks associated with illegal, unsafe, or counterfeit products, nor did it adopt effective measures to limit their dissemination. These requirements apply because AliExpress is designated as a very large online platform under the DSA. Articles 34 and 35 require such platforms to identify systemic risks arising from the design and operation of their services, and to introduce reasonable and effective measures to address these risks.

The investigation found that AliExpress had failed to properly assess whether it had the necessary resources to review potentially illegal listings. Furthermore, the Commission considered that the company had overestimated the effectiveness of its detection and removal systems. Consequently, illegal products could remain available for several weeks, and advertising and recommender systems could increase their visibility. The measures used to prevent sanctioned traders from returning to the platform were deemed inadequate, as was the brand authorisation system intended to restrict counterfeit listings.

The decision focuses on how AliExpress assessed and addressed systemic risks across its platform. It does not determine whether individual listings infringed a particular trade mark or other intellectual property right. Nevertheless, the assessment covered counterfeit goods, unsafe toys, dangerous cosmetics, and other products that did not comply with applicable rules. Therefore, the Commission has ordered AliExpress to submit an action plan by 20 October 2026, detailing how it will address the infringements. Failure to comply may result in periodic penalty payments, and the commitments accepted in 2025 will remain binding and subject to independent monitoring.

AliExpress disagrees with the decision, describing the fine as disproportionate and arguing that it does not reflect its risk management measures or the changes already made. The company intends to challenge the decision.

EUIPO refuses Rosalía’s LUX trade mark for lack of distinctive character

On 6 June 2025, Spanish singer Rosalía Vila Tobella applied to register the EU word mark LUX (no. 019198973). The application covered musical and audiovisual recordings, electronic devices, and publications in Class 9; clothing and footwear in Class 25; and live performances and other entertainment services in Class 41. This sign would later become the title of Rosalía's fourth studio album, which was released in November 2025.

However, the EUIPO initially objected to the application in July 2025, finding that the sign lacked distinctive character for all the claimed goods and services. Rosalía’s representatives submitted observations challenging this decision. Following a further examination, the Office issued a second notice of refusal in February 2026, providing additional reasons for its position. No further observations were submitted within the prescribed period.

The EUIPO subsequently rejected the application in its entirety under Articles 7(1)(b), 7(1)(c) and 7(2) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation. The assessment focused primarily on how Romanian-speaking consumers in the EU would interpret the word 'LUX'. An objection arising in only one EU member state is sufficient to prevent the registration of an EU trade mark.

In Romanian, 'lux' is associated with luxury, elegance, refinement, and superior quality. The Office relied on dictionary definitions and examples of the term's use in the Romanian market to conclude that consumers would immediately recognise it as a promotional message. Rather than indicating the commercial origin of the products or services, the sign would suggest that they were luxurious, exclusive, or of a particularly high quality.

This reasoning extended beyond clothing and electronic products. Evidence examined by the EUIPO showed that 'lux' and 'de lux' were also used in connection with deluxe editions of musical recordings, luxury audio equipment, publications, and entertainment services. Therefore, the Office considered that the same promotional meaning would be understood in relation to the goods and services in Classes 9 and 41. The word contained no unusual structure, play on words or other element that could lead consumers to immediately perceive it as a trade mark.

Rosalía’s representatives disputed the connection between LUX and the English word 'luxury', questioning the reliability and interpretation of the dictionary evidence. They also argued that the sign could be understood in different ways, since 'lux' is a unit of measurement for illumination and 'lux' is the Latin word for 'light'. In their view, these meanings gave the sign a fanciful and distinctive character in relation to the products and services in question.

Furthermore, the representatives cited earlier EU and Romanian registrations containing the word 'LUX', as well as the acceptance of an equivalent application by the UK Intellectual Property Office. However, the EUIPO noted that these examples did not alter its assessment. Alternative meanings were deemed insufficient, as Romanian-speaking consumers would primarily interpret the sign as a promotional reference to luxury or superior quality. While earlier registrations could be considered, they did not automatically entitle the applicant to register a later application, particularly since they covered different goods or had been accepted under different circumstances. The UK decision was not binding because the EU trade mark system operates independently of national and non-EU systems.

The decision concerns the registrability of the word 'LUX' for the goods and services listed in the application. It does not rule on its use as an album title or in other commercial activities. Rosalía may appeal against the refusal to the EUIPO Boards of Appeal. A notice of appeal must be filed within two months of notification, followed by the grounds of appeal within four months.