Государство, гражданское общество истабильность 129
Research Article / Научная статья
УДК 347.77
DOI: 10.14258/SSI(2026)3–07
Risks to Users' Personal Safety from Intellectual Property
Violations in Е-Commerce: Social Aspects
AnnaV. Pokrovskaya
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russia,
pokrovskaya-anvl@rudn.ru, https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6473-2027
Abstract. is article considers the societal element of risks associated with personal security
of e-commerce users aected by the violation of their rights in the area of intellectual property
(IP). An analysis of the most widespread kinds of violative activity is done, including the pro-
duction of counterfeit items, imitation of the design of transactional internet stores, the violation
of trademarks in the internet store, as well as assessing the inuence of these activities on the
personal security and psychological well-being of e-commerce users. Special attention is paid to
the loss of consumer trust in the internet environment and the 'leaks' of personal information of
users in the internet space generally. Recommendations from the current paper cover raising the
digital literacy of internet store users, installing automated monitoring systems for security threat
sources and creating feedback solutions; the role of coordination of eorts of the Government, the
business sector, and civil society organizations in creating the needed secure internet environment
is underlined.
Keywords: e-commerce, intellectual property, personal security, digital literacy, social risks,
user protection
Financial Support: the publication was carried out within the framework of the Grant Sup-
port System for Scientic Projects of the RUDN University, project “Development of atheoretical
model for expanding access to justice by identifying and eliminating regulatory uncertainty in
procedural legislation and violating the application of civil procedural and arbitration procedural
legislation” (scientic advisor Bashilov B.I.)
For citation: Pokrovskaya, A. V. (2026). Risks to Users' Personal Safety from Intellectual Property
Violations in Е-Commerce: Social Aspects. Society and Security Insights, 9(3), 129–142. (InRuss.). doi:
10.14258/ssi(2026)3–07
Риски для личной безопасности пользователей, связанные
снарушениями прав интеллектуальной собственности
вэлектронной коммерции: социальные аспекты
Анна Владимировна Покровская
Российский университет дружбы народов, Москва, Россия,
pokrovskaya-anvl@rudn.ru, https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6473-2027
Society andSecurity Insights № 3 2026 130
Аннотация. Встатье рассматривается социальный аспект рисков, связанных с лич-
ной безопасностью пользователей электронной коммерции, пострадавших отнарушения
их прав вобласти интеллектуальной собственности (ИС). Проводится анализ наиболее
распространенных видов противоправной деятельности, включая производство контра-
фактной продукции, имитацию дизайна интернет- магазинов, нарушение товарных зна-
ков в интернет- магазинах, а также оценивается влияние этой деятельности на личную
безопасность и психологическое благополучие пользователей электронной коммерции.
Особое внимание уделяется потере доверия потребителей кинтернет- среде и«утечкам»
личной информации пользователей винтернет- пространстве вцелом. Рекомендации, со-
держащиеся вданной статье, включают повышение цифровой грамотности пользователей
интернет- магазинов, внедрение автоматизированных систем мониторинга источников
угроз безопасности и разработку решений пообратной связи; подчеркивается роль ко-
ординации усилий правительства, бизнес- сектора иорганизаций гражданского общества
всоздании необходимой безопасной интернет- среды.
Ключевые слова: электронная коммерция, интеллектуальная собственность, личная
безопасность, цифровая грамотность, социальные риски, защита пользователей
Финансирование: публикация выполнена врамках Системы грантовой поддержки
научных проектов РУДН, проект «Разработка теоретической модели расширения обе-
спечения доступа кправосудию путем выявления иустранения нормативной неопреде-
ленности впроцессуальном законодательстве инарушения применения норм граждан-
ского процессуального иарбитражного процессуального законодательства» (науч. рук.
Башилов Б.И.)
Для цитирования: Покровская А. В. Риски для личной безопасности пользователей, свя-
занные снарушениями прав интеллектуальной собственности вэлектронной коммерции: со-
циальные аспекты // Society and Security Insights. 2026. Т. 9, № 3. С. 129–142. doi: 10.14258/
ssi(2026)3–07
Introduction
Within the past few years, e-commerce has developed very fast and currently has
an ever-increasing role in the modern economy. E-commerce sites are used daily for
millions of people, and these sites are used for the purchase of goods, payment for services,
consumption of digital content, and transfer of business information (Kedah, 2023).
Although the emergence and growth in digital frameworks have opened new avenues
for sellers and consumers, at the same time, the usage of intellectual properties is also on
an increase in the context of e-commerce. Such violative acts directly aect the owners
of intellectual properties, as well as the lost prots, reputation, and innovation that could
have occurred. e harm arising from such acts to the user community itself is much
more severe and not immediately visible to the naked eye. e buyers who procure such
materials or services may be at risk of being frauded upon, denied their account details,
aected by apersonal data information leak, or may face nancial losses (Kim et al.,
2011). In addition, there may be an absence of any kind of service guarantee due to the
illegal goods being transmitted. Relevance to this study can be linked to the importance
of conducting acritical assessment of social implications related to e-commerce users
resulting from intellectual property infringement. e most signicant concerns among
Государство, гражданское общество истабильность 131
them involve approaches leading to threats of personal security, approaches leading to
loss of personal information, approaches involving deception and fraud, and approaches
covering protection measures.
e aim of this study is to analyze approaches related to risks related to e-commerce
users’ security aer intellectual property infringements. In pursuit of the goal, there is
aneed to explore the most common types of violations that may exist in the realm of
e-commerce and estimate their social inuence, which includes the security of individuals
participating in e-commerce. Among the issues that need to be investigated to meet the
goal of the research include the most probable scenarios that may put individuals at risk
of being fraudulently cheated, having their personal and/or payments stolen, as well as
being presented with other dangers. e nal aim of the research is to come up with
astrategy to prevent such dangers.
E-commerce, as a new branch, is based on advanced information technologies
and builds a genuinely global market. In this context, intellectual property is very
relevant and consists of rights to copyrights of soware products and audio/video les,
trademarks, patents, trade secrets, distinctive technology, and designs. Ahigh level of
legal and technological protection for intellectual property rights is necessary for the
whole business and its development. In this way, intellectual property protection is
becoming avery challenging task in the virtual world because it is easy to copy and
distribute any information through digital technology. In these regards, it is not rare
that regular users lack access to tools for detecting intellectual property infringements.
Because of this, intellectual property abuse is not only athreat to business and economy
anymore; it also increasingly inuences social aspects and the safety of e-commerce
users.
Methodology
is research is based on amulti- stage methodology integrating both quantitative
and qualitative tools to comprehensively analyze risks associated with personal
safety in e-commerce. e primary empirical material consists of systematic content
analysis and case studies. e content analysis was conducted on materials published
between January 2021 and June 2026, covering cases of data breach, online fraud,
phishing, and identity the. Sources of data include scientic articles, ocial reports
from cybersecurity organizations, database records of incidents in e-marketplaces,
and published user accounts related to security incidents. e key information sources
and databases included Web of Science, Scopus, РИНЦ (Russian Science Citation
Index), ocial government statistical portals, reports from INTERPOL and national
cybersecurity centers, as well as media archives such as LexisNexis and electronic library
systems. e selection criteria included geographical coverage (focus on European and
Russian digital marketplaces) and the presence of documented consumer impact. e
methodology for this research integrates quantitative and qualitative approaches to
ensure comprehensive risk analysis in the context of users’ personal safety and intellectual
property violations within digital marketplaces. is study employs acomprehensive
interdisciplinary methodology, combining methods of content analysis, comparative
legal analysis, and empirical data collection. e content analysis focuses on published
Society andSecurity Insights № 3 2026 132
accounts and documented user experiences related to data breaches, online fraud, and
phishing attacks aecting consumers in digital marketplaces. e analyzed period
covers 2022 to 2026-this timeframe was selected to capture recent trends and the latest
legislative responses. Data sources include scientic journals indexed in Scopus and
Web of Science, reputable news portals (such as BBC, Reuters, Kommersant), annual
reports of cybersecurity rms (Kaspersky Lab, Group- IB), and ocial communications
from regulatory authorities like the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA)
and Russia’s Roskomnadzor.
Main Forms of Intellectual Property Violations in E-Commerce
ere are a number of IP-related issues that exist within the e-commerce
environment that violate the rights of copyright owners both now and subsequent to
its occurrence due to its subsequent ramications on the market itself (Mbah, 2024).
e most predominant of them is the sale of counterfeited products that can be dened
as copies that imitate the original by replicating the design, packaging, labeling, and
branding that are unique to the one that was copied. Usually, counterfeit goods are
produced using poor-quality materials. Moreover, the materials used are not specied.
Actually, one should not rely on these materials because they are not trustworthy. e
eects of these poor-quality goods are unforeseen. Consequently, these goods not only
have dismal performance but also pose a signicant threat to the lives of the users.
Moreover, these goods have the potential to trigger accidents. Consequently, these
accidents can result in injuries and even death. e reason behind this tragic outcome
is the oversight of the manufacturers. e manufacturers overlook the safety of users
because their main focus is on gaining maximum prot.
Lookalike online shops and copycat sites, which resemble and function just like
ocial sites of established brands, pose agrave risk to both consumers and businesses
alike (Dogan & Lemley, 2004). ese websites utilize identical layouts, logos, and design
elements to deceive customers, harvest their personal information, and illicitly sell or
disseminate fakes in the name of authentic goods. is, in turn, not only harms the
corporate image and nancial gains of the brand but also erodes consumer condence in
the entire e-commerce domain (Otim & Grover, 2010). Use of another entity's trademark
and brand name without permission is, however, another form of infringement worth
highlighting. ese perpetrators usually utilize trade mark and brand name in domain
names, online store names, advertising campaigns, and site descriptions in order to
exploit brand recognition and deceive consumers about their goods’ authenticity and
source in abid to lure more trac and customers to their sites and online stores (Belcyzk,
2002), with the sole purpose of making illegal gains and eecing customers, especially
through lookalike domain registration with a view to appropriating customers and
reaping illegal gains
59
.
For eective measures against these types of counterfeits, companies are
employing content monitoring and tracking tools, automated detection of similar
goods and trademarks (Berman, 2008), cooperation with legal services, and litigation
59
Panavision International, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir. 1998).
Государство, гражданское общество истабильность 133
against oenders for blocking violators and the removal of improperly listed goods on
the platforms. Such initiatives are crucial for ensuring balanced competition, brand
integrity, and security for users on an online marketplace.
IP has become one of the essential assets for contemporary corporations, and even
the biggest companies are obliged to protect their rights actively, both in court and
through collaboration with online services (Ewing, 2012). One example for this would
be the Apple vs. Samsung lawsuit, where Apple sued arival rm for patent infringement
and iPhone design copying in 2011
60
. e lawsuit was launched in dierent countries,
and in the US, Samsung was declared guilty of multiple charges and was obliged to
compensate Apple heavily for the infringement. is suit became aleading example for
the need for patenting within the modern tech sector. Also, aleading example for this
would be the lawsuit of fashion brand Louis Vuitton against online service eBay for
promoting the sale of its LV brand goods with acounterfeiting mark on them
61
. In 2008,
acourt in France declared eBay responsible for the promotion of the said counterfeits
and obliged Louis Vuitton to compensate them for the damage.
Another fascinating case is that of Tiany & Co., which is an illustrious jewelry
brand that sued the retail company Costco for using "Tiany" to mark its display boxes
for jewelry because such use was misleading to their customers
62
. In 2017, the court
ordered that Costco should compensate Tiany for the violation of its trademark, which
thus establishes that companies can successfully safeguard their brands with retail
giants as well.
Such cases prove that it is necessary for large brands in the contemporary world to
be able to protect intellectual assets in court. Legal practices not only promote company
rights but also ensure that there is acertain standard on aglobal level.
Social Risks and reats to Users
e social risks and threats that exist online for users are also extremely broad, and
it is likely that all users could be aected in one way or another. Given the rapid pace
of technology changes that occur daily, users also risk fraud and attempt to be deceived
(Cai, & Zhu, 2016). Search engines, social networks, e-commerce websites, and online
forums also have plenty of misinformation, misinformation that amounts to reviews on
products that do not exist or oer poor quality products and services (Paul & Nikolaev,
2021). In this way, users also risk having products that have been labeled as products that
belong to brands that exist. Additionally, there is also fraud that users get from online
websites that promise services that do not exist or have poor quality. Data breaches and
use also exist as threats online and have broad impacts on users (Confente, 2019). Most
online websites also ask for users’ data in one way or another. Whether it is personal
details like name and address to online photo scans like copies of identication. Given
that these websites also lack adequate security and any mistakes or vulnerabilities that
60
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 11-CV-01846-LHK, U.S. District Court,
Northern District of California, filed April 15, 2011.
61
Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. eBay, Inc., Tribunal de Commerce de Paris, June 30, 2008.
62
Tiffany & Co. v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 994 F. Supp. 2d 474 (S.D.N.Y. 2014).
Society andSecurity Insights № 3 2026 134
exist within these websites, it is likely that this data could be open to other users online
(Appiah et al., 2017). ese data can be used not only for sending spam and adverts.
Additionally, it could also be used for fraud and other online crimes. is could also
amount to blackmail. is online fraud also does not occur instantaneously. Users also
may not know that adata leak took place until months later.
Financial risks posed by the loss of funds to fraudsters, whose sophistication in
scams keeps growing every year, are also very common. ere are payment scam pages
that dupe the customer into transferring funds directly to the fraudster, while others
are abusive services that compel them to purchase costly subscription packages with
the intent to do so without prior notice (Dahlgreen, 2023). Investment scams with the
bait of high returns are very common and end up with the customer losing the full
amount of the investment. ere are also emails and messages oering assistance and
charity donations, among others, whose intent is to fraudulently withdraw money from
the customer, and these are very common on the internet (Kim, 2011).
However, the cause of the loss of trust in digital platforms and institutions resulting
from all the risks mentioned above will be given special attention. e continuous reports
about big breaches of data security, fraud by mass numbers of fraudsters, misuse of users'
information by digital platforms, as well as alack of information on digital platforms,
are generating apoor image within society (Rajendran, 2023). In addition to all that has
been stated above, this will make members of society less motivated to take advantage
of digital platforms, less condent about adopting new technologies that could benet
them, including digital means for interacting with institutions.
Each one of all these dangers proves the value of information security awareness.
is is because protecting users is aduty shared by all people in society, information
product creators, and relevant public bodies who are responsible for overseeing all this.
e more developed, alert, and responsible all people within cyberspace are, the less
dangers exist and the greater condence in technology is.
Personal Security in the context of Inadequate Intellectual Property Protection
e issue of inadequate protection for intellectual property in the cyber world
aects the personal and physical security of the internet fraternity in amajor manner
63
. In
today's world, aperson's intellectual property, no matter if in the form of literary writing,
pictures, music, or any form of soware, can be freely used by third parties without one's
consent (Gana, 2017). is not only leads to areduced possibility of monetary gain but
also opens one up to awhole lot of other risks as well.
e various risks associated with using the internet as amedium for the expression
of ideas include the fact that anyone who uses this medium is liable to become avictim
of illegal use of their creativity (Lessig, 2004). Such losses might be even more signicant
for professional writers, designers, musicians, or IT experts, as these issues are directly
related to professional fulllment and nancial circumstances. IT-savvy creatives feel
the pains related to copyright issues much more acutely and sensibly than others do. For
IT-savvy creatives, copyright issues may symbolize not only loss, but perhaps the the of
63
Yahoo!, Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et L’Antisemitisme, 433 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2006).
Государство, гражданское общество истабильность 135
part of one’s identity that has been developed over time as part of an idea that has been
worked on over several years (Kow, 2017).
At the same time, the public audience, most of which views the digital content for
their own purposes, remains relatively unaware of the threats and tends to believe that
the digital content is public property (Samuelson, 2003). reat perceptions for various
generations and professional audiences remain to aconsiderable extent dependent on their
own experience of interacting with the digital environment. For instance, the younger
generation of people, which has always been exposed to the active use of the digital
environment and the cross- platform form of communication, is more relaxed and more
oen tends to reproduce and redistribute other people's content (Zelenkauskaite, 2017).
e young generation is accustomed to the idea of collective creativity without any clear
boundaries of intellectual authorship. e other generations of people, which hold on to
the traditional view of the authorship of the intellectual production, tend to be much more
cautious and apprehensive of the use and protection of their intellectual property. e
socio- psychological eects of violation of the rights to intellectual property may be quite
substantial for individuals and for the entire professional community (Mironova, 2014).
e authors, who nd their rights being repeatedly infringed, tend to develop feelings
of frustration, injustice, and even powerlessness faced with the reality of the digital
environment that makes it quite dicult to prosecute the violators (Moohr, 2003). e
situation provokes anxiety, loss of trust for the digital communities and platforms, and
the lack of motivation to emerge and assert oneself through the intellectual production
and the contribution to the digital environment. ese issues tend to become magnied
for the young authors. e plagiarism of their intellectual production and the illegal
use of their intellectual production tend to induce feelings of disillusionment with the
choice of the professional activity and the cessation of the intellectual and creative work
for the benet of the digital environment
64
. e professional community’s presence of
plagiarism and the misuse of the ideas, on the other hand, tends to promote increased
tension and unwillingness to engage with any form of public debate and the sharing of
their own experience, which is detrimental to the free competition and the development
of the professional eld itself (McKay, 2014).
e lack of adequate intellectual property rights is also aecting consumer dynamics
and behavioral patterns. ose people who have at least one experience of their content
being wrongfully used or "stolen" tend to selectively upload their content on the platform
of choice, restricting access to their work or even going for private copying (Smith, 2021).
Apattern of isolating themselves within their communities of practice, where there is
trust and security felt for sharing their ideas, is on the rise (Trust & Horrocks, 2017).
Others will not commit their work for publication, fearing loss of control over it.
However, simultaneously, there is a growing number of users who, because of
a non-stringent framework and a non-eective rights protection system, become
indierent to the legality of their content. e habit is being formed to freely replicate
and redistribute other people's content without any credits, which encourages pirating,
downgrades the value of intellectual property, and has anegative impact on adigital
64
Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991).
Society andSecurity Insights № 3 2026 136
culture of consumption (Frosio, 2016). On a long-term outlook, this entails slowing
down the development of creative industries, hindering the formation of excitement
for original content development, and shaping cultural attitudes toward working with
IP (Pager, 2012). All mentioned above indicates that anon-protection of IP rights in
adigital space is both alegal and asocio- psychological problem with regard to personal
safety, well-being, and behavior of users.
Results
e results of the study illustrate agrowing trend in the incidence of intellectual
property violations in e-commerce, particularly related to counterfeiting, piracy, and the
unauthorized use of digital content. Quantitative analysis revealed asignicant uptick
in cases where consumers encounter fake online stores, phishing websites, and digital
goods with infringed copyrights. Data from recent surveys indicated that over 30% of
users experienced at least one attempt at fraud related to intellectual property violations
within the past year.
e research conducted demonstrates anoticeable increase in the range and scale
of threats faced by users in the e-commerce sector, particularly relating to the inadequate
protection of intellectual property rights. Analysis of the data reveals that users are not
only vulnerable to traditional forms of internet fraud but are increasingly impacted by
sophisticated counterfeit operations, phishing schemes using fake intellectual property,
and the spread of unlicensed or pirated goods across both established and new online
platforms.
Athorough comparative analysis of statistical reports and case law has revealed
changes in the nature and volume of intellectual property violations in e-commerce.
Recent years have seen particularly sharp growth in the number of phishing sites, online
fraud schemes, and the use of fake domains mimicking legitimate businesses. is trend
not only undermines the trust of ordinary users in digital platforms but also presents
signicant risks to their nancial security and personal data integrity.
e analysis conrms that the most widespread forms of IP violation in e-commerce
remain the unauthorized use of trademarks, sale of counterfeit goods, and digital piracy.
Survey and case data reveal that small and medium- sized enterprises are at increased
risk due to limited resources and legal protection mechanisms. Notably, victims report
signicant nancial and reputational losses, as well as reduced consumer condence in
digital platforms.
e analysis conrms that the most widespread forms of IP rights violation in
e-commerce — counterfeit goods sales, lookalike sites, and unauthorized trademark
use — are directly associated with increased personal risks for users, including
exposure to fraud, the or misuse of payment information, hacking, and personal data
leaks. For instance, a content analysis of judicial proceedings and reports revealed
recurring patterns in which users became direct victims of fake online stores or brand
impersonation, leading to signicant nancial and reputational losses.
e evidence further substantiates the hypothesis that low digital lite1 стracy
and insucient legal awareness among users are substantial factors increasing their
Государство, гражданское общество истабильность 137
vulnerability to online fraud and rights violations. is conclusion is drawn from
analysis of case studies as well as examination of reports and publications detailing how
users, unaware of protection mechanisms or the signicance of verifying authenticity,
are more oen deceived or become involved in infringements unknowingly.
Social repercussions, systematically documented across the reviewed sources,
include anoticeable decline in users’ trust toward digital platforms, persistent perceptions
of cybersecurity threats, and a sense of diminished control over personal data and
creative content. Content creators and professionals, as evidenced in legal and qualitative
accounts, oen experience frustration, asense of injustice, and loss of motivation for
further engagement when their intellectual works are repeatedly infringed, supporting
the notion of broader socio- psychological impact. e study’s comparative review of
counteraction strategies identies automated content identication systems (such as
those used by major platforms), as well as educational initiatives to increase digital
literacy, as the most eective existing measures for user protection. ese conclusions
are supported by positive outcomes reported in cases where such tools or programs have
been actively implemented.
Based on the aggregation of these data-driven ndings, which encompass
a comprehensive analysis of current international and national legal frameworks,
systematic examination of judicial and law enforcement practice, as well as areview of
empirical cases involving leading digital platforms and user communities, the results
highlight the critical need for an integrated and multi- level security approach in
e-commerce environments. e research utilized published statistics on the prevalence
of IP violations, case law analysis from dierent jurisdictions, thematic analysis of user
reports about data breaches and digital fraud, and acomparative review of the eectiveness
of technical, legal, and educational countermeasures. Both technical solutions — such
as adoption of advanced user authentication protocols and automated IP protection
systems — and educational measures — such as targeted digital literacy campaigns —
are necessary for sustainable improvement in user safety. Equally, empirical analysis of
regulatory and practical frameworks across jurisdictions supports the recommendation
for the creation of user-friendly mechanisms for reporting copyright violations and for
fostering collaboration among digital platforms, users, and regulatory authorities.
In summary, the combined legal, technological, and social evidence collected and
analyzed in this study underscores that the eective mitigation of personal and social
risks for e-commerce users requires coordinated eorts encompassing technological
innovation, ongoing user education, and robust regulatory oversight. ese ndings
provide aconcrete basis for further targeted research and the development of practical
strategies to ensure both user security and the sustainable protection of intellectual
property rights in digital commerce.
Discussion
e study's results clearly demonstrate that the problem of intellectual property
rights protection and the associated risks to user security in e-commerce is complex and
multifaceted. In practice, the eectiveness of measures to combat and prevent violations
Society andSecurity Insights № 3 2026 138
is largely determined not only by the technical capabilities of platforms and the presence
of formal regulatory requirements, but also by the level of user awareness and culture,
as well as the degree of openness and interaction between businesses, government, and
society. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that modern threats have signicantly evolved
compared to previous decades. While damage from IP infringement was previously
considered the exclusive preserve of copyright holders (businesses and authors), today,
schemes are increasingly common in which end users are the primary victims: they
suer both direct nancial losses and secondary eects — compromised personal data,
loss of trust in digital platforms, and the development of anxiety and social isolation.
e analysis revealed not only technological and organizational risks but also clear
psychosocial consequences of mass violations. Given the rapid development of digital
services, new forms of digital fraud are emerging, and social engineering methods are
rapidly spreading. is increases the burden not only on technical protection measures
but also on the individual responsibility of users, as well as the need for continuous
training and adaptation to evolving digital risks.
An important part of the discussion relates to the need for coordination among
stakeholders. Eective combating IP infringement is impossible without the participation
of users themselves, who must be motivated to adhere to the basic principles of digital
ethics and report violations. is also includes the involvement of online platforms
themselves, which are obligated not only to use automated mechanisms for detecting
and blocking illegal content but also to develop tools for legal information and feedback.
Government agencies, in turn, must not limit themselves to reactive measures, but also
develop educational projects, improve legislation to reect the digital transformation,
and periodically conduct open consultations with industry and civil society. One
of the pressing issues today is the emergence of articially created (neural network)
content, blurring the boundaries between original and generated content. is requires
the development of new ethical and legal approaches, as well as a public consensus
on collective responsibility. erefore, along-term solution to reducing risks to users'
personal safety in e-commerce is only possible through a systemic approach that
includes technological innovation, the development of digital culture, legal literacy, and
ongoing dialogue between all online market participants. Only the synergy of technical,
educational, legal, and ethical tools will enable the creation of asafe, sustainable, and
innovation- driven digital society.
Practical Recommendations for Mitigating Risks
Practical advice for minimizing risks and consequences of intellectual property
infringement in the online space includes multiple aspects and should be carried out
in aholistic and multi- party manner, involving online community members and the
government. First of all, there should be improved levels of legal literacy within the
online community. is includes the fact that many cases of infringement arise due to
aperson's lack of familiarity with the present legislation and amisunderstanding about
using copyrighted material by, for example, retweeting acopyrighted image or adding
music in avideo. To avoid such occurrences, one needs to investigate and comprehend
Государство, гражданское общество истабильность 139
basic notions about copyright, patent, and other similar rights, as well as the dierence
between free and restricted use, and be familiar with dierent licenses, including Creative
Commons. In today's hyperconnected and highly accessible online environment, there
are enough tutorials and guides for handling online content, and one should denitely
make use of them.
Indeed, it is necessary to thoroughly examine the usage terms for any materials, as
well as make sure that there is alicense or permission; or, in case the status is doubtful,
use the material directly from the source or pick material that is for free distribution in
reputable databases.
Online resources and governmental bodies play an important role in preventing
violations. e major online resources are actively implementing automated content
recognition systems, such as Content ID, which analyze uploaded les and identify them
with adatabase of protected content immediately aer detection. Simplied complaint
handling, eective processing of requests, information campaigns, and educational
resources in the platform help users not only upload their content but also understand
what is allowed. e emergence of atransparent monetization system is yet another
stimulus for writers to publish their content legally, creating a healthy environment
for creative industry development. It is equally important to point out government
involvement, which includes improvement in legislation — its adaptation to modern
digital practices and technologies — in addition to educational interventions: holding
special days, educational marathons, preparing educational videos, and teaching people
about corresponding judicial matters. e government also assists writers and devs with
grants, legal help, and developing services for online copyright registration.
erefore, ensuring an eective reduction of risks of IP violation can only be
guaranteed within an overarching framework that incorporates awareness education
among users, as well as support within internet platforms, together with the engagement
of relevant state institutions. Such an approach enables the creation of asafe, fair, and
trusting cyberspace that also enables the prevention of conicts within an overarching
culture that respects IP.
Conclusion
Analysis conrms that asafe and fair online environment is acomplex issue that
necessitates acollaborative eort among all parties: internet users, online platforms, and
governmental bodies. Every aspect plays acrucial role in promoting asense of responsible
behavior in the digital world. Users bear the responsibility for awareness and respect
for rights of others, online platforms for the development of tools to ensure eective
monitoring and response to infringers, and governmental bodies for transparent and
current legislation.
It is essential to mention key points in protecting rights online, which may include
enhancing digital literacy among its people, updating laws regularly to accommodate
emerging content and threats, and taking advantage of modern technology solutions
such as automated violation detection systems. All this encourages a culture of
compliance with laws, enables users to respect one another as well as give content
Society andSecurity Insights № 3 2026 140
creators condence in protecting their intellectual properties. Future research may
involve exploring more complex emerging content sources from AI, examining legal
and moral considerations they pose, creating and rening tools for copyright protection,
and advancing cooperation to prevent cybercrime. It is essential to take acloser look
at eective programs related to user education and awareness eorts to inform users
and content creators about emerging dangers and principles associated with code-of-
conduct practices for protecting their rights.
e best practices in ensuring asafe cyberspace include aholistic approach involving
regular thematic training sessions for all ages of users, beginning educational campaigns
on digital rights and responsibilities, being open and accessible to information on the
rules of operation on digital platforms, having feedback and response mechanisms in
place, and keeping up with new threats and updating legislation in light of the realities
of technological advancements. Building acollaboration between governments, digital
platforms, and international entities in sharing best practices and collaborating on
eorts for the protection of rights in cyberspace would also be essential. By adopting
these approaches, not only would there be adecrease in the number of conicts and
uncoordinated eorts in cyberspace, but there would also be atrusting environment,
innovation, and sustainable growth in the digital society.
REFERENCES
Appiah, V., Nti, I. K., & Nyarko- Boateng, O. (2017). Investigating Websites and Web Ap-
plication Vulnerabilities: Webmaster’s Perspective. International Journal of Applied In-
formation Systems, 12(3), 10–15.
Belcyzk, T. (2002). Domain Names: e Special Case of Personal Names. BUL Rev., 82,
485.
Berman, B. (2008). Strategies to detect and reduce counterfeiting activity. Business Ho-
rizons, 51(3), 191–199.
Cai, Y., & Zhu, D. (2016). Fraud detections for online businesses: aperspective from
blockchain technology. Financial Innovation, 2(1), 20.
Confente, I., Siciliano, G. G., Gaudenzi, B., & Eickho, M. (2019). Eects of data breach-
es from user-generated content: Acorporate reputation analysis. European Management
Journal, 37(4), 492–504.
Dahlgreen, J. (2023). Catastrophic fraud loss lies where it falls? Push payment scams and
the bank’s duty of care to its customer. Journal of Financial Crime, 30(6), 1845–1852.
Dogan, S. L., & Lemley, M. A. (2004). Trademarks and consumer search costs on the in-
ternet. Hous. L. Rev., 41, 777.
Ewing, T. (2012). Indirect exploitation of intellectual property rights by corporations
and investors: IP privateering and modern letters of marque and reprisal. Hastings Sci.
& Tech. LJ, 4, 1.
Frosio, G. F. (2016). Resisting the resistance: resisting copyright and promoting alterna-
tives. Rich. JL & Tech., 23, 1.
Государство, гражданское общество истабильность 141
Gana, R. L. (2017). Has creativity died in the ird World? Some implications of the
internationalization of intellectual property. In Globalization and Intellectual Property
(pp. 433–468). Routledge.
Kedah, Z. (2023). Use of e-commerce in the world of business. Startupreneur Business
Digital (SABDA Journal), 2(1), 51–60.
Kim, W., Jeong, O. R., Kim, C., & So, J. (2011). e dark side of the Internet: Attacks,
costs and responses. Information systems, 36(3), 675–705.
Kow, Y. M., Chen, Y., Cheng, W., & Nit, S. H. (2017, June). Creative information use among
young adults: Challenges for learning and opportunities for media (re) design. In Proceed-
ings of the 2017 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 407–420).
Lessig, L. (2004). How big media uses technology and the law to lock down culture and
control creativity. New York : Penguin Press, 5(2004), 115.
Mbah, G. O. (2024). US Intellectual Property Law and Its Impact on Business: Recent
Developments and Trends. International Journal of Science and Research Archive, 13,
3279–95.
McKay, T. M. (2014). Combating plagiarism using acommunity of practice approach.
South African journal of higher education, 28(4), 1315–1331.
Mironova, O.I., Pluzhnikova, N.I., Akimova, N.N., Nekrasova, M.V., Shagaeva, E.A.,
& Zhukova, V.I. (2014). Social and psychological factors of the compelled choice of pro-
fession. J. Advanced Res. L. & Econ, 5, 147.
Moohr, G. S. (2003). e crime of copyright infringement: An inquiry based on morali-
ty, harm, and criminal theory. BUL Rev., 83, 731.
Otim, S., & Grover, V. (2010). E-commerce: abrand name’s curse. Electronic Markets,
20(2), 147–160.
Pager, S. A. (2012). Accentuating the Positive: Building Capacity for Creative Industries
into the Development Agenda for Global Intellectual Property Law. Am. U. Int'l L. Rev.,
28, 223.
Paul, H., & Nikolaev, A. (2021). Fake review detection on online E-commerce platforms:
asystematic literature review. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 35(5), 1830–1881.
Rajendran, R. (2023). Data breach fraudulence and preventive measures in e-commerce
platforms. In Advancements in Cybercrime Investigation and Digital Forensics (pp. 161–
184). Apple Academic Press.
Samuelson, P. (2003). Mapping the digital public domain: reats and opportunities.
Law & Contemp. Probs., 66, 147.
Smith, C. Y. (2021). Weaponizing Copyright. Harv. JL & Tech., 35, 193.
Trust, T., & Horrocks, B. (2017). ‘I never feel alone in my classroom’: teacher profession-
al growth within ablended community of practice. Professional development in educa-
tion, 43(4), 645–665.
Zelenkauskaite, A. (2017). Remediation, convergence, and big data: Conceptual limits of
cross- platform social media. Convergence, 23(5), 512–527.
Society andSecurity Insights № 3 2026 142
INFORMATION ABOUT THE AUTHOR / ИНФОРМАЦИЯ ОБ АВТОРЕ
AnnaV. Pokrovskaya — Cand. Sci. (Legal Sciences), Patent Attorney of the Russian
Federation, Assistant at the Department of Civil Law and Procedure and Private
International Law, Law Institute, RUDN University, Patent Practice Expert, Skolkovo
Intellectual Property Center, LLC, Moscow, Russia.
Анна Владимировна Покровская — канд. юрид. наук, патентный поверен-
ный РФ, ассистент кафедры гражданского права ипроцесса имеждународного
частного права юридического института, РУДН, эксперт патентной практики,
ОООЦИС «Сколково», г.Москва, Россия.
The article was submitted 11.01.2026;
approved after reviewing 25.08.2026;
accepted for publication 10.09.2026.
Статья поступила вредакцию 11.01.2026;
одобрена после рецензирования 25.08.2026;
принята кпубликации 10.09.2026.
