Willful blindness is never a defense to contributory trademark infringement or counterfeiting. This has been the standard ever since the 2010 Tiffany (NJ) Inc. v. eBay, Inc. decision when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...more
Last week, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc., No. 18-1233,[1] in which it held that the plaintiff in a trademark infringement action need not prove that the defendant acted...more
5/5/2020
/ § 1125(a) ,
§ 1125(c) ,
Appeals ,
Burden of Proof ,
Charge-Filing Preconditions ,
Compensatory Awards ,
Dilution ,
Lanham Act ,
Lost Profits ,
Remand ,
Remedies ,
Romag Fasteners v Fossil ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
Vacated ,
Willful Infringement