SHEIN, Temu Clash Over Product Photos in U.K. Trial

SHEIN and Temu’s legal battle in the U.K. puts product images, marketplace responsibility, and supplier control at the center of the fight.

The trial opened at the London High Court this week, with SHEIN accusing Temu of using thousands of product photos from its site to advertise copied clothing.

Temu denies the allegations and argues that SHEIN is using copyright claims to weaken a rival.

The two companies also sued each other in the U.S.

At the center of the U.K. trial is a question with bigger implications for online retail. 

When third-party sellers post listings, how much responsibility actually belongs to the marketplace?

For eCommerce platforms and fast-fashion labels, this case highlights how product imagery functions as both a sales tool and a protected brand asset.

The outcome could set a precedent about how marketplaces handle ownership, seller oversight, and the reuse of commercial content at scale.

Temu has also counterclaimed for damages after removing thousands of product listings following an injunction obtained by SHEIN.

A separate part of the dispute, expected to be heard next year, involves Temu’s allegation that SHEIN used exclusive supplier agreements that breached competition law.

The Business Value of Product Images

SHEIN claims Temu used photos of SHEIN-branded clothing to sell similar or copied items on its site.

The company argues that these images were part of its own investment in suppliers, product presentation, and online merchandising.

In court, SHEIN's legal team described the alleged infringement as happening at an "industrial scale."

The company is seeking orders that would require Temu to remove allegedly infringing images.

Temu, of course, disputes this framing, arguing that the case is about SHEIN trying to limit fair competition.

Temu also claims SHEIN has gaps in ownership paperwork for some images, including questions around photographers and supplier contracts.

SHEIN rejects this argument and says most of the disputed images were taken by its own employees.

The case has also drawn reactions online, where some users pointed to past criticism SHEIN faced over alleged design copying.

One Instagram user called it "the most ironic lawsuit in online shopping," capturing the wider disbelief around one fast-fashion giant accusing another of copying.

The overlap has also become content in its own right.

U.K.-based YouTuber Roxxsaurus posted comparison videos asking whether the platforms are selling the same products.

The court will decide the legal implications, but shoppers have clearly been noticing the similarities, too.

The dispute shows how much commercial weight product photography now carries.

For fast-fashion brands, images carry much of the selling work, helping move items quickly, keep listings consistent, and support high-volume selling.

Online Marketplace Rules Face Pressure

The case could reshape how much responsibility marketplaces carry for seller-uploaded content and copied images.

Temu argues that merchants are responsible for the listings and images they upload.

On the other hand, SHEIN is saying that Temu can't be treated as a passive host if the platform benefits from listings that use copied images.

If courts impose stricter oversight, platforms may need tighter controls around listings, suppliers, and takedown systems.

The trial gives marketers three useful takeaways:

• Product images need stronger records. Brands should know who shot each image, who owns it, and where that proof sits.
• Marketplaces need clearer listing controls. Seller uploads can become a brand, legal, and trust issue at speed.
• Supplier access is part of the brand fight. Control over production partners can matter as much as customer demand.

For the wider market, it raises a platform control question: How closely should online marketplaces police seller uploads?

Our Take: Can Marketplaces Stay Hands-Off?

We think this case is important because fast fashion runs on speed, volume, and repeatable content.

This model faces pressure when ownership of product photos, supplier links, and listing controls ends up in court.

The retail risk is already clear even without a court decision.

Online marketplaces can't treat product images as just background material. They carry commercial value, proof of ownership, and brand trust.

For retailers and agencies, the safer move is boring but necessary.

Keep cleaner records, check listing rights earlier, and make takedown processes easier to defend.

Looking to protect brand assets and retail content across online channels? Explore these top eCommerce marketing agencies in our directory.