Harley-Davidson is once again taking legal action against online sellers accused of selling counterfeit merchandise bearing its trademarks. On October 21, 2026, Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc. filed a new Schedule A lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, targeting e-commerce businesses allegedly selling unauthorized motorcycle parts, apparel, jewelry, and other branded products.
The lawsuit, Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, Case No. 1:26-cv-12965, raises important concerns for third-party sellers offering motorcycle merchandise through online marketplaces.
Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, Case No. 1:26-cv-12965, Complaint, filed October 21, 2026, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
This is not Harley-Davidson's first lawsuit of this kind. In our August 7, 2025 article, "Harley-Davidson Targets Online Sellers in New Lawsuit", we covered the company's earlier enforcement action against e-commerce sellers accused of trademark infringement.
Now, more than a year later, Harley-Davidson is pursuing another group of online sellers. The latest complaint illustrates how trademark disputes involving branded merchandise can develop into federal litigation.
What Is Harley-Davidson Alleging in Its New Lawsuit?
According to the October 21 complaint, Harley-Davidson alleges that multiple online storefront operators have used counterfeit or infringing versions of its federally registered trademarks to advertise, distribute, and sell unauthorized products.
The complaint identifies motorcycle parts, apparel, jewelry, and other merchandise as categories of allegedly infringing goods.
Harley-Davidson also alleges that some sellers operate under multiple aliases, making it difficult to identify the individuals or businesses behind the storefronts. The company claims that these sellers use similar advertising practices and create storefronts that may appear to consumers to be authorized Harley-Davidson retailers.
The lawsuit asserts two principal claims under the Lanham Act:
• Trademark infringement and counterfeiting: Harley-Davidson alleges that the defendants used counterfeit reproductions of its registered trademarks in connection with commercial sales.
• False designation of origin: The company claims that the defendants' activities could mislead consumers into believing their products were manufactured, sponsored, or approved by Harley-Davidson.
These are allegations made by Harley-Davidson and have not been established as findings of liability.
Which Harley-Davidson Products Could Put Online Sellers at Risk?
Harley-Davidson's trademark rights extend beyond motorcycles themselves. The company has developed a recognizable brand across clothing, accessories, motorcycle components, and licensed merchandise.
For online sellers, the concern is not limited to products advertised as official Harley-Davidson motorcycles or replacement parts.
The October 2026 complaint identifies several trademarks, including the Harley-Davidson name, its Bar & Shield logo, the Willie G. Skull logo, and the Dark Custom logo.
Sellers should pay particular attention to how these trademarks appear on their products, packaging, photographs, and marketplace listings.
Motorcycle Parts and Accessories
Businesses selling motorcycle components, decorative accessories, or replacement parts may encounter trademark concerns when their products display Harley-Davidson branding without authorization.
For example, a seller offering an aftermarket motorcycle accessory with a reproduction of the Bar & Shield logo may face a different legal risk than a seller accurately describing an independently manufactured component as compatible with a particular motorcycle model.
Using a brand name to identify compatibility is not automatically trademark infringement. However, prominently displaying protected logos or presenting a product as officially manufactured or endorsed by Harley-Davidson may raise infringement concerns.
Apparel and Motorcycle Lifestyle Merchandise
Harley-Davidson's trademarks are also associated with clothing and lifestyle products.
Online sellers offering shirts, jackets, hats, patches, or other merchandise bearing Harley-Davidson trademarks should consider whether those goods are genuine, properly licensed, or independently produced using protected branding.
A seller does not necessarily avoid trademark liability simply because the merchandise is marketed as fan apparel or motorcycle-inspired clothing.
Jewelry and Decorative Products
The complaint also identifies jewelry among the categories of allegedly unauthorized merchandise.
Products featuring recognizable Harley-Davidson logos, including skull designs associated with the brand, may raise trademark concerns depending on the design, its commercial use, and whether consumers are likely to believe the product is connected to Harley-Davidson.
However, not every skull design, motorcycle illustration, or biker-themed product infringes Harley-Davidson's trademarks. The specific design and how it is presented to consumers matter.
How Marketplace Listings Can Become Part of a Trademark Dispute
One notable allegation in the new complaint concerns how sellers use Harley-Davidson trademarks to attract customers through online searches.
Harley-Davidson alleges that some defendants incorporate its trademarks into website content, text, and metadata to appear in search results for branded products.
The company also claims that certain storefronts avoid using its trademarks directly in product titles while employing descriptions intended to attract consumers searching for Harley-Davidson merchandise.
For online sellers, this distinction matters because trademark disputes are not always limited to the physical product.
Product titles, descriptions, promotional images, and storefront representations may become relevant when determining whether a listing creates confusion about a product's origin or affiliation.
Nevertheless, accurately identifying a genuine product or describing compatibility with a motorcycle brand does not automatically constitute infringement. Whether a particular use is lawful depends on the circumstances.
What Could Happen If a Seller Is Named in the Lawsuit?
Harley-Davidson is seeking monetary damages and court orders intended to prevent further alleged infringement.
Its requested relief includes restrictions on the sale and distribution of infringing merchandise, the removal of certain online advertisements, recovery of defendants' profits, and statutory damages for alleged willful trademark counterfeiting.
The complaint requests statutory damages of up to $2 million for each use of the trademarks under the cited counterfeiting provision. This is a request for relief, not an amount that the court has awarded.
Although the complaint seeks injunctive relief, the filing alone does not establish that a temporary restraining order has been granted or that any particular seller's funds have been frozen.
In Schedule A litigation, plaintiffs may seek emergency court orders that affect online storefronts and marketplace accounts before a final judgment is entered.
For sellers unfamiliar with this process, our guide, What Is a Schedule A Lawsuit and How to Fight It, explains how these cases work and why multiple storefront operators may be named in a single federal lawsuit.
Sellers concerned about emergency restrictions can also review our guide to temporary restraining orders and frozen marketplace accounts for an explanation of how TROs can affect marketplace operations.
Does Selling Genuine Harley-Davidson Merchandise Constitute Trademark Infringement?
Not necessarily. A seller may be able to lawfully resell genuine Harley-Davidson merchandise even without being an authorized dealer.
Under the first sale doctrine, trademark owners generally cannot prevent the resale of genuine products simply because the reseller is not part of their authorized distribution network.
However, the doctrine has limitations. Trademark disputes may arise when products are materially different from authorized goods, when legitimate quality controls are bypassed under circumstances recognized by law, or when a seller's marketing creates confusion about an affiliation with the trademark owner.
For example, purchasing genuine Harley-Davidson merchandise from a legitimate source and accurately advertising it for resale presents different considerations from manufacturing new merchandise bearing the company's protected logos without authorization.
Sellers should also be careful when describing themselves as authorized dealers or official distributors if they do not have that relationship with Harley-Davidson.
For a more detailed explanation, read our article on the first sale doctrine and trademark law for Amazon sellers.
What Should Sellers Do If They Receive Notice of a Harley-Davidson Lawsuit?
If an online seller discovers that their storefront has been named in a Harley-Davidson Schedule A lawsuit, their response should begin with understanding the specific allegations and any court orders entered against them.
The seller should preserve product listings, supplier invoices, purchase records, marketplace communications, and any documentation showing where the disputed merchandise originated.
These records may help establish whether the products are genuine, whether their sale was authorized, or whether potential defenses apply.
Sellers should also determine whether the court has issued a temporary restraining order or other restrictions affecting their marketplace accounts.
Ignoring a federal lawsuit can have serious consequences, including a default judgment. Even sellers who believe they have done nothing wrong should take the allegations and applicable response deadlines seriously.
An attorney experienced in infringement defense and Schedule A litigation can review the complaint, evaluate potential defenses, and help determine the appropriate response.
Harley-Davidson's Continued Enforcement Efforts
The October 2026 lawsuit follows the enforcement action we discussed in August 2025, demonstrating that Harley-Davidson continues to pursue online sellers it believes are infringing its trademarks.
For sellers of motorcycle parts, apparel, and accessories, the important takeaway is that trademark enforcement can extend beyond obvious counterfeit motorcycles or products explicitly advertised as official merchandise.
How a product is sourced, branded, described, and presented to consumers can all become relevant in an infringement dispute.
As more brands use Schedule A litigation to address alleged online counterfeiting, third-party sellers should understand both their responsibilities and the legal protections that may be available to them.
Facing a Harley-Davidson Schedule A Lawsuit? We Can Help.
Being named in a Schedule A lawsuit can create significant challenges for an online business, particularly when marketplace accounts, product listings, or funds are restricted.
At Stockman & Poropat, PLLC, we represent online sellers facing trademark infringement allegations, Schedule A lawsuits, temporary restraining orders, and other intellectual property disputes.
Our attorneys can review the allegations against your business, evaluate potential defenses, address court-imposed restrictions, and explore possible resolutions based on your circumstances.
Learn more about our Infringement Defense services, including how we assist sellers facing Schedule A litigation and frozen marketplace funds.
If your business has been named in a Harley-Davidson lawsuit or is facing a trademark infringement claim, contact Stockman & Poropat, PLLC to discuss your legal options.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Have a question about your matter?
Schedule a free consultation with Stockman & Poropat, PLLC.
Contact the firm
