PERU: From Brand Infringement to Human Rights Violations

Counterfeiting is frequently framed as a purely commercial or economic issue, centered on the harm it causes to trademarks, rights holders, and legitimate markets. This narrow approach overlooks a far more serious reality: counterfeiters often produce and distribute goods within informal and illegal economies that rely on exploitation, unsafe labor conditions, and the absence of basic protections.  

On December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Criminal Chamber of Appeals of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima, Peru, decided the Nicolini case (Resolution No. 782, Case 04467-2017-0), where intellectual property (IP) counterfeiting escalated to a matter of life and death. 

In 2017, a large fire broke out at the Nicolini commercial gallery in the Las Malvinas area of Lima. Two young workers, Jovi Herrera and Jorge Luis Huamán, died after being trapped inside a metal container installed on the building’s rooftop. Investigations revealed that they were locked inside during working hours and were unable to escape once the fire started. The tragedy exposed extreme levels of informality and shocked the country. 

These young men were forced to remove original trademarks from imported Chinese fluorescent tubes and replace them with well-known trademarks, allowing the products to be sold at higher prices. They also participated in the storage and distribution of these goods.  

This was not an isolated instance of infringement, but part of a structured counterfeit operation embedded in an illegal market that depended on secrecy, control, and vulnerable labor. 

On January 16, 2026, Peru’s Supreme Court upheld prison sentences of more than 30 years against defendants Jonny Coico Sirlopu and Vilma Marveli Zeña Santamaría, convicting them of human trafficking for labor exploitation in its most severe form: slavery. This landmark ruling marked the first final conviction for this crime in the country and underscored the direct link between counterfeiting activities and serious human rights violations. 

The Nicolini case forces a broader understanding of the consequences of IP infringements. Protecting trademarks is not only about safeguarding commercial interests or enforcing exclusive rights; it is also about dismantling illegal economies that thrive on informality and human exploitation. Equally important is IP education. Educating consumers about the real consequences of purchasing counterfeit goods is essential to reducing demand and preventing future harm. 

Ultimately, the Nicolini case shows that counterfeiting is never victimless. IP protection, supported by effective education and awareness, is a fundamental tool not only for market integrity, but also for promoting social responsibility. 

Although every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of this article, readers are urged to check independently on matters of specific concern or interest. Law & Practice updates are published without comment from INTA, except where it has taken an official position.   

© 2026 International Trademark Association