Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
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.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
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.
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.