Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

An Overview of Recovering Trademark Infringement Damages

By Marcus Harris and Ryan Burandt
December 01, 2018

While enjoining infringing activity is the objective of most trademark infringement lawsuits, an analysis of the potential damages available in a trademark infringement action and the methodology for proving damages should be conducted prior to filing a complaint. Basic questions that need to be answered before filing a lawsuit include:

  • When are courts likely to award monetary damages?;
  • What methodology for proving damages is appropriate for the particular facts of the case?; and
  • How does a plaintiff establish monetary damages?

This article discusses recovering damages for trademark infringement and various strategies for establishing those damages.

In an infringement action, "[d]amages are typically measured by any direct injury which a plaintiff can prove, as well as any lost profits which the plaintiff would have earned but for the infringement." Lindy Pen Co. v. Bic Pen Corp., 982 F.2d 1400, 1407 (9th Cir. 1993), abrogated on other grounds by SunEarth, Inc. v. Sun Earth Solar Power Co., 839 F.3d 1179 (9th Cir. 2016). In trademark cases, plaintiffs can seek: 1) the defendant's profits; 2) an award of actual damages sustained by the plaintiff; 3) recovery of costs of the action; 4) an award of reasonable attorney's fees (in exceptional cases); and 5) statutory damages. Int'l Star Class Yacht Racing Ass'n. v. Tommy Hilfiger, U.S.A., Inc., 80 F.3d 749,752-53 (2d Cir. 1996). An award of actual damages can take the form of: a) lost sales or revenue; b) corrective advertising or the cost to prevent, correct or mitigate consumer confusion; and c) harm to market reputation/loss of goodwill. A plaintiff may also seek reasonable royalties and lost franchise fees. N.Y. Racing Ass'n v. Stroup News Agency Corp., 920 F.Supp. 295, 302 (N.D.N.Y. 1996); Hair Assoc. v. Nat'l Hair Replacement Servs., Inc., 987 F. Supp. 569, 596 (W.D. Mich. 1997).

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It Image

Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

A Lawyer's System for Active Reading Image

Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.

Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls Image

With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.