Converse Claims Counterfeit

Jan 26, 2024

Trademark Infringement Lawsuit | Converse Claims Counterfeit

Well, you’ve been named in a counterfeit lawsuit filed by Converse. What does this mean for your online business?! Before we dive into that, know that this is not a reason to panic. It’s not necessarily the end of your online selling career! Is it disruptive? Will the suit cost you money? Yes and yes. But, just because allegations of trademark infringement were made does not mean you should walk away. 

If you take a look through the legal complaint associated with the lawsuit, you’ll see that it is a template. The content of the complaint differs from other such infringement lawsuits because it pertains to Converse. Why is it a template? Why are the allegations almost exactly the same as many other suits filed in the same court? Because this is what’s called a Schedule A lawsuit. Converse, and other brands like it, file these counterfeit claims as Schedule A so they can accuse a long list of online sellers at once. The majority of Schedule A lawsuits are aimed at e-commerce operators based in China. By spraying a bunch of sellers with allegations of infringement, Converse can more efficiently address what they believe to be counterfeit sales of their goods. 

“Schedule A” Lawsuit Filed by Converse

The so called “damage[] through consumer confusion, dilution, and tarnishment of [Converse’s] valuable trademarks,” alleges the brand, comes from the actions of the Defendants. What are these actions? Sellers – perhaps you among them – fraudulently represented themselves as authorized dealers and sold counterfeit goods online to customers in the United States. The platforms where this supposed activity occurred include Amazon, Etsy, Temu, Walmart, and more. 

As we mentioned, the legal complaint is pretty much a template. The allegations, therefore, are basically the same as all the other Schedule A infringement cases we’ve written about in the past. Chief among the claims, Converse states the Defendants work together to conceal their identities, share counterfeit tips, and otherwise strategically dupe consumers so that they can sell fake products and avoid taking legal responsibility once caught. 

Now, what’s the main type of disruption this case causes for online sellers? A Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). The restraining order affects your ability to sell Converse and other branded products on various platforms. Not only does it stifle your agency as a seller, it also freezes all the money in your online selling account! That means, any money you earned from selling Converse products – you can’t touch it. You can’t move it. It’s frozen! What should sellers do at this point?

Is Reaching a Settlement the Best Option?

We have seen many sellers attempt to settle directly with brands like Converse. Reaching a settlement in a trademark infringement case is definitely an option. Is it the best option? Perhaps not. The reason why it may not be advantageous for sellers to settle with brands accusing them of counterfeit is simple. Money. Brands that wage infringement allegations against online sellers in Schedule A suits usually settle with the Defendants for 60% of their frozen money. That’s over half of the money sellers earned from selling on their own.

Consider what we mentioned earlier regarding Schedule A lawsuits. The type of filing gives companies the power to claim a good many sellers engaged in counterfeiting. If Converse settles at 60% with all of the named sellers in this case, they’ve reaped a healthy amount of money from mere allegations with a minimal amount of headache. The strategy, for Converse, is beneficial. For sellers, not so much. 

Before you do anything, please don’t abandon the issue! And, provide a response to the court! You can easily avoid a more complicated outcome, which is a Default Judgment, by responding. The cost of walking away might very well exceed what it will cost you to take action and find a resolution. You’ll have many more options as a Defendant if you respond to the court. We’ve seen many sellers accused of infringement walk away and then get stuck paying damages with little room for a solution. Don’t let that happen to you!

Respond to the Lawsuit, Get an Attorney | Converse Claims Counterfeit

And, to make the need for a response more convincing, you should know that if you abandon the lawsuit, you’ll lose all that frozen money. That’s right! Sellers who do nothing will forfeit all of the money in their account, frozen by the TRO, to Converse. It goes straight to them! So, should you retain legal counsel and develop a resolution that is more favorable? We would say of course! 

Undoubtedly, taking legal action as a seller will comes at a cost. Is it worthwhile? In most cases, it is. An attorney can work with Converse on your behalf so that you can be cleared of any wrongdoing and keep your hard-earned money! You don’t want the reputation of your business to be damaged any further than it already has been. By responding, utilizing an intellectual property attorney, and investing a reasonable amount of effort and resources, you can get back to selling and earning to your fullest potential! 

Contact our team at Stockman & Poropat, PLLC today! We will chat with you during a free consultation and decide on the best strategy to move forward.

Download the legal complaint below:

Up next we will be discussing the Chrome Hearts Trademark Infringement lawsuit.

We're Here To Help!


Contact us today for a free consultation, let us light the way to a resolution!

Check out our full blog!

Did you enjoy this story? Leave a comment below and check out our other articles!

Amazon Request Payment Button: What Sellers Need to Know About DD+7

Amazon Request Payment Button: Understanding DD+7 for Sellers The Amazon Request Payment Button is appearing for more sellers as Amazon expands access to manual payout controls under its DD+7 reserve framework. The feature itself is not entirely new. However, its...

Mattel Schedule A Lawsuit Filed Against Online Sellers

Mattel Schedule A Lawsuit Filed Against Online Sellers The Mattel Schedule A lawsuit filed on April 14, 2026, in Case No. 1:26-cv-04164, adds another major brand name to the growing list of companies pursuing aggressive trademark enforcement against online sellers....

Bronny James Trademark Denial: Why USPTO Rejected B9

Bronny James Trademark Denial: Inside the USPTO Rejection of the B9 Logo Bronny James trademark denial has become one of the most talked-about branding stories in the sports business this month, and for good reason. Nike’s attempt to register Bronny James’ stylized B9...

Milwaukee Trademark Lawsuit Targets Online Sellers

Milwaukee Trademark Lawsuit Targets Online Sellers in New SDNY Filing Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation has filed a new Milwaukee trademark lawsuit in the Southern District of New York. The case was filed on April 2, 2026, under Case No. 1:26-cv-02721-LAP. This...

Amazon Fuel Surcharge 2026: What Sellers Should Know

Amazon Fuel Surcharge 2026: What It Means for Sellers Amazon has introduced a new fuel and logistics-related surcharge that will affect sellers using Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA). This Amazon fuel surcharge 2026 may appear incremental, but it reflects a broader shift...

Toho TRO Lawsuit Targets Online Sellers

Toho TRO Lawsuit Targets Online Sellers in New York The Toho TRO lawsuit targets online sellers in the Southern District of New York. On March 20, 2026, Toho filed this action under Case No. 1:26-cv-02303. The company relies on a temporary restraining order (TRO) to...

Taylor Swift Trademark Case: Reverse Confusion Explained

Taylor Swift Trademark Case: When Big Brands Overwhelm Smaller Marks You build your brand the right way. You invest years into your name, your audience, and your identity. You secure a federal trademark. Then a global superstar enters the market with a nearly...

New York Takes on Loot Boxes: Are They Illegal Gambling?

New York Targets Video Game “Loot Boxes” as Illegal Gambling The question of whether loot box gambling under New York laws applies to modern video games is now front and center. The New York State Attorney General’s Office has filed a lawsuit against Valve...

Katy Perry Trademark Dispute Breakdown

Katy Perry Trademark Dispute Comes to an End The Katy Perry trademark dispute has officially come to a close after more than 15 years of litigation, with the High Court of Australia ruling in favor of Australian fashion designer Katie Perry. The decision allows the...

Tendernism Trademark: A Lesson in Brand Protection

The Tendernism Trademark Story: A Lesson in Protecting the Brand People Associate With You The Tendernism trademark story is a clear example of how quickly a viral phrase can evolve into something much more valuable. In the age of social media, a single phrase can...

Let's work together

Please don’t hesitate to reach out to our team. We’re happy to answer any question you may have, whether big or small. Our team is dedicated to guiding you to a resolution to your issue.

Don’t hesitate!

Click Here