The UPA-A Is Open-Sourcing a Counter-Attack on Counterfeit Paddle Brands

The pickleball industry is facing a growing threat that goes far beyond a few knockoff paddles showing up on sketchy websites. Counterfeit pickleball equipment has evolved into what Jason Aspes, President of the United Pickleball Association of America, calls “an existential threat to both the game and the legitimate business of paddle manufacturing.” In response, the UPA-A is mobilizing paddle manufacturers across the country to fight back with a coordinated, open-source approach that could fundamentally change how the industry protects itself.

On November 27, Aspes sent an email to all sanctioned paddle manufacturers outlining the severity of the counterfeit paddle problem and proposing concrete steps the industry can take to regain control. The message was clear: counterfeit and knockoff paddles threaten player safety, brand integrity, and the long-term health of pickleball as a sport. But rather than leaving individual brands to fight this battle alone, the UPA-A is proposing something different—a unified framework where companies share their best practices, strategies, and technologies to combat counterfeiting more effectively.

Understanding the Counterfeit Paddle Problem

For those new to this issue or unfamiliar with the extent of the problem, it helps to understand what we’re actually talking about when we discuss counterfeit pickleball paddles. These aren’t just generic paddles that look similar to popular models. We’re talking about exact replicas that copy everything from paddle designs to brand names, model names, and even product images. They’re being sold on major platforms like Alibaba, Temu, and Facebook, often at prices that seem impossibly low because they are.

Imagine you’re shopping online and you see a Selkirk Boomstik—a paddle that normally retails for $333—being sold on Temu for just $28. It looks identical to the real thing in the photos. The product description uses the same language. The brand name is right there. But what you’re actually getting is a shoddily made knockoff that might look like the original on the outside while being completely different on the inside. The materials are inferior, the construction methods are cheaper, and the performance characteristics bear no resemblance to the legitimate paddle that engineers spent months or years developing.

The problem extends beyond just deceiving consumers. When counterfeit manufacturers copy a paddle design, they’re stealing the intellectual property that brands invested significant time and money to create. They’re also potentially putting players at risk, since these fake paddles haven’t undergone the same safety testing and quality control processes that legitimate manufacturers implement. And perhaps most insidiously, they’re undermining the economic foundation that allows paddle companies to continue innovating and improving the sport.

The Scale of the Counterfeit Crisis

As reported last month, the counterfeit pickleball paddle market isn’t just growing—it’s thriving. Clones and fakes of popular paddles from respected brands like Selkirk, JOOLA, CRBN, Six Zero, and numerous others are scattered across online marketplaces. Sometimes these counterfeits are obviously cheap knockoffs that anyone with a discerning eye could spot. Other times, they appear virtually identical to the genuine article, making it nearly impossible for the average consumer to distinguish between authentic and fake.

The consistency, however, is in the pricing. These counterfeits are invariably offered at prices that seem too good to be true, because they are. Yet consumers continue to buy them, either knowingly seeking out a bargain or unknowingly believing they’ve found a legitimate deal. This creates a vicious cycle where counterfeit sellers profit from the reputations that legitimate brands have built, while those same legitimate brands watch their market share and profits erode.

For paddle manufacturers, combating counterfeits has become an exhausting game of regulatory Whac-A-Mole. The economics of paddle manufacturing are complex: immense amounts of time, money, and effort go into researching, designing, testing, and manufacturing innovative paddles at a mass scale. Engineers work to find the perfect balance of materials, weight distribution, surface texture, and construction methods. Companies invest in testing equipment, pursue certifications from governing bodies, and build relationships with suppliers who can consistently deliver quality components.

When a counterfeit brand decides to sell a knockoff—often going so far as to copy exact model names, use stolen product images, and mimic marketing language—the burden falls entirely on the targeted brand to protect its work. This protection process is both expensive and extraordinarily time-consuming. Brands must identify the counterfeit listings, gather evidence, file complaints with the platforms hosting the sellers, potentially pursue legal action, and then start the entire process over again when the same counterfeiters pop up under different names or on different platforms.

The resource drain is significant enough that some brands have been forced to dedicate entire staff positions to protecting their intellectual property from counterfeit sellers. One brand shared that it has manually identified and reported nearly 400 counterfeit companies this year from Temu and Alibaba alone. That’s 400 separate investigations, 400 sets of takedown notices, 400 instances of playing defense against bad actors who face minimal consequences and can simply rebrand and start selling again.

The UPA-A’s Open-Source Solution

What Jason Aspes and the UPA-A are proposing represents a fundamental shift in how the pickleball industry approaches the counterfeit problem. Rather than leaving each brand to navigate this situation independently, duplicating efforts and reinventing wheels, the UPA-A is advocating for a unified, open-source approach that allows the entire industry to benefit from collective knowledge and experience.

The core concept is straightforward but powerful: compile a comprehensive list of specific steps, technologies, and practices that paddle brands have successfully implemented to prevent counterfeiting. This includes authentication measures like holograms or QR codes, supply chain controls that track paddles from manufacturing to retail, digital verification systems that allow consumers to confirm authenticity, legal enforcement strategies that have proven effective, and any other tactics that have helped brands protect their products.

In his email to paddle manufacturers, Aspes framed the initiative clearly: “This is a problem that can be more efficiently handled if we can do so in a consolidated manner as opposed to each brand having to navigate this unfortunate situation on their own.” The resulting compilation will be organized into a “Best Practices for Combating Counterfeit Paddles” document that will be shared publicly with the industry.

This open-source approach offers several advantages. First, it prevents brands from wasting resources on strategies that other companies have already tried and found ineffective. Second, it accelerates the adoption of proven counterfeit-fighting measures across the industry, raising the overall level of protection. Third, it creates a knowledge base that can be continuously updated as new threats emerge and new solutions are developed. And fourth, it sends a clear message to counterfeiters that they’re no longer facing individual companies but rather a coordinated industry response.

The UPA-A’s goal, as Aspes articulated it, is to “create a unified and proactive framework to help all brands safeguard their products and collectively protect the integrity of pickleball.” This isn’t just about protecting corporate profits—though that’s certainly part of it. It’s about ensuring that the sport can continue to innovate, that players can trust they’re buying safe and legitimate equipment, and that the economic ecosystem supporting pickleball remains healthy enough to fuel continued growth.

What This Means for Consumers

While much of the UPA-A’s initiative focuses on industry-level coordination, the counterfeit paddle problem directly affects everyday pickleball players. Understanding how to protect yourself as a consumer is crucial, especially as counterfeit paddles become increasingly sophisticated in their mimicry of legitimate products.

The most reliable way to ensure you’re buying an authentic paddle is remarkably simple: purchase directly from the source. Go to the brand’s official website, or buy from established, reputable retailers who have direct relationships with manufacturers. If you’re buying a paddle from a secondary market—whether that’s a third-party Amazon seller, a Facebook marketplace listing, or a too-good-to-be-true offer on Temu—you’re taking a significant risk that you could end up with second-rate quality at best, or a dangerous product at worst.

The appeal of saving money is understandable, especially as paddle prices have climbed in recent years. But the savings from buying a counterfeit paddle are illusory. You’re not getting a $333 paddle for $28; you’re getting a $28 paddle that’s pretending to be something it’s not. The performance won’t match what you’re expecting, the durability will be questionable, and you’ll have no recourse if something goes wrong. More importantly, every dollar spent on counterfeit paddles funds an ecosystem that actively harms the sport by stealing from the companies that drive innovation and quality improvements.

Looking Forward: A Coordinated Campaign

The “Best Practices” document represents just the opening move in what the UPA-A envisions as a larger, coordinated campaign against the increasing threat of counterfeit paddles. While specific details of future initiatives weren’t disclosed, the implication is clear: this is an ongoing effort that will evolve as the industry learns more about the scope of the problem and the effectiveness of various countermeasures.

The success of this initiative will depend on several factors. First, paddle manufacturers need to actively participate by sharing their experiences, both successes and failures, in combating counterfeits. This requires a level of transparency and cooperation that doesn’t always come naturally in competitive business environments, but the existential nature of the threat may provide sufficient motivation.

Second, online platforms that host counterfeit sellers need to become more responsive and proactive in policing their marketplaces. While brands can identify and report counterfeits, the platforms themselves are best positioned to implement systematic solutions that prevent counterfeit sellers from simply creating new accounts after being shut down.

Third, consumers need to become more educated about the counterfeit problem and more discerning in their purchasing decisions. The apparent bargain of a deeply discounted paddle needs to be recognized for what it actually is: a support system for bad actors who are undermining the sport.

Finally, there may need to be legal and regulatory changes that make it easier for brands to pursue counterfeiters and harder for counterfeiters to operate with impunity. This could involve working with law enforcement, engaging with international trade organizations, or pushing for legislative changes that strengthen intellectual property protections in the digital marketplace.

The Broader Implications for Pickleball’s Future

The counterfeit paddle problem sits at the intersection of several trends that will shape pickleball’s future. The sport’s explosive growth has created enormous market opportunities, which naturally attract both legitimate businesses and bad actors looking to profit without investing in quality or innovation. The global nature of e-commerce makes it easy for counterfeit manufacturers—often based in countries with lax intellectual property enforcement—to reach American consumers directly.

Meanwhile, the rapid pace of paddle innovation has created a market where new models with improved performance characteristics are constantly being released. This innovation requires significant investment in research, development, and testing. When counterfeiters copy the results of this investment without bearing any of the costs, they undermine the economic model that makes innovation possible. If brands can’t recoup their development costs and earn returns that justify continued investment, the pace of innovation will slow, and the sport will suffer.

There’s also a question of trust at stake. Pickleball has grown partly because it’s perceived as an accessible, welcoming sport with a strong community ethos. If consumers start to feel that they can’t trust what they’re buying, or that the sport is being overrun by scammers and counterfeiters, it could damage that perception and slow growth.

The UPA-A’s initiative recognizes that fighting counterfeits isn’t just about protecting individual brands—it’s about protecting the integrity and future of the sport itself. By creating a coordinated, industry-wide response, they’re attempting to address a problem that no single company can solve alone. The open-source approach to sharing best practices represents an acknowledgment that in this fight, former competitors need to become allies.

Conclusion

The battle against counterfeit pickleball paddles is entering a new phase. What was once an annoying but manageable problem has evolved into a genuine threat to the sport’s economic foundations and continued innovation. The UPA-A’s decision to coordinate an industry-wide response through open-source sharing of best practices represents a meaningful step toward addressing this challenge more effectively.

For paddle manufacturers, this initiative offers hope that they won’t have to fight this battle alone, and that collective action might prove more effective than individual efforts. For consumers, it underscores the importance of buying from legitimate sources and being skeptical of deals that seem too good to be true. And for the sport of pickleball as a whole, it demonstrates that the industry’s leadership recognizes the threat and is taking proactive steps to address it before it spirals further out of control.

The coming months will reveal whether this coordinated approach can make a meaningful dent in the counterfeit paddle market. But one thing is clear: the industry is no longer content to play defense in this regulatory game of Whac-A-Mole. By working together and sharing knowledge openly, paddle manufacturers are hoping to turn the tables on the counterfeiters and protect the sport they’ve all worked so hard to build.