Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Damages In Trademark Infringement Litigations

By Mark A. Salky and Jessica Johnson Fishfeld
September 01, 2020

During a time when online marketing, virtual shopping and electronic communication are more widely used than ever, it is critically important for entertainment industry businesses to be highly aware of how they are using trademarks, the scope of a trademark owner's rights and the consequences of infringing them. Parties utilizing trademarks to market and sell their goods or services should be careful not to infringe on an existing trademark, else they be subject to monetary consequences in addition to equitable remedies like an injunction. And for many, the amount of recoverable damages at stake is a primary driver to strategic decisions regarding when to initiate, defend or settle litigation.

Federal trademark infringement is governed by the Lanham Act. Under that statute, a trademark owner may recover three broad categories of monetary damages: actual damages, disgorgement of the defendant's profits, and attorney fees and costs. See, 15 U.S.C. §1117(a). Each category of damages subject to recovery is discussed below, along with strategies for both plaintiffs and defendants to consider.

A plaintiff whose trademark was infringed may recover actual damages. These comprise monetary losses the plaintiff actually sustained as a result of the defendant's infringement. Actual damages can often be difficult to prove because it typically requires evidence that consumers were actually confused by the infringing trademark and that the confusion caused the plaintiff an economic loss, such as lost profits or loss of goodwill. For lost profits, the plaintiff must demonstrate that it would have received certain revenue but for the defendant's infringement. Loss of goodwill is determined by comparing the value of the trademark before and after the infringement to show that the value decreased. These can be presented through evidence of diverted sales or a consumer survey, sometimes done with the help of an expert. Additionally, the plaintiff might show that it sustained loss through corrective advertising costs incurred to correct confusion caused by the defendant's infringement. However, corrective advertising costs are only recoverable if the plaintiff and defendant are direct competitors in the same market.

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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.