Luxottica Claims Online Sellers Offering Counterfeit Products to Consumers, Trademark Action
Luxottica has taken aim once more at online sellers, accusing them of trademark infringement and counterfeiting! As an affected seller, you may not even have to imagine, but rather know just how disruptive this lawsuit is. If you’ve been accused of intellectual property infringement in the past, then you certainly understand. For those who haven’t or who want to simply stay informed, this article will serve as an overview of the case. At Stockman & Poropat, PLLC, we want to ensure you’re equipped with every piece of information you need to get through this situation!
Let’s start with a topic that will often arise when it comes to infringement cases. In terms of Luxottica’s latest trademark action, the topic is very relevant. We’re talking about direct settlements! E-commerce operators getting sued for counterfeit sales may consider attempting to directly settle with the Plaintiff. For sure, our firm wants you to exercise every right available to you. Negotiating directly with Luxottica is within any affected seller’s rights. But it begs the question, is trying to resolve the matter without an attorney of your own going to be effective?
To answer that question, we’ll provide some data. It’s been reported and documented that the average direct settlement hovers at around 60%. And, that’s more than half of what, precisely? Your hard-earned revenue! That’s right, if you choose to negotiate on your own with the Plaintiff, you may be positioning yourself to take an unnecessary loss. Stockman & Poropat, PLLC doesn’t want to see you go through that, if we can help it. And, we can help! By tailoring a legal strategy for you, utilizing a creative and practical approach, we’ll give you the best chance to protect your business.
Luxottica Temporary Restraining Order | Luxottica Trademark Action Against Online Sellers
How’s this Luxottica infringement lawsuit going to inhibit your day-to-day e-commerce operation? Simple – a temporary restraining order. The Plaintiff wants to have the court approve of a TRO so that they can stop sales of what they deem infringing goods. All of Luxottica’s eggs are in this basket, so to speak. Without the TRO, the Plaintiff is limited in what they can compel the named sellers to do. And, the court will very likely approve of the injunction. Though it may not seem fair, Luxottica is entitled to file such a trademark lawsuit and seek a restraining order. Regardless of the fact that the details of the lawsuit are rooted in allegations!
What’s the point of the injunction, from the Plaintiff’s perspective? Well, Luxottica’s argument is that the actions of the sellers have cost them revenue. Additionally, the Plaintiff wants to establish that there’s some manner of deception ongoing with these actions, as well. See, Luxottica alleges that the Defendants have relied on various tactics to disguise their true identity. In conjunction with that claim, the Plaintiff says that these tactics are so effective that the average consumer is unable to determine the legitimacy of a given product. Luxottica doesn’t want to see any unauthorized sales of counterfeit goods, period. This is why they’re looking to get the restraining order.
Stockman & Poropat, PLLC Can Protect Your E-Commerce Business
The Luxottica allegations don’t stop there, either. One of the main allegations is that the Defendants actually make up a “counterfeit network.” It’s through this network, says the Plaintiff, that the named sellers are able to continue to sell counterfeit products. Is this definitely true and accurate for each and every Defendant? If you had to guess, you’d probably say no, and you’d be right! The allegations are not the same as proof or any sort of condemnation, it’s just what Luxottica believes. But even with that being the case, sellers will still face disruptions as a result of the lawsuit.
If all of the above sounds like somewhat of a headache, that’s because it certainly can be. No e-commerce operator wants to have an outside entity step in and control their money. At least, that would be very rare if they did. Rest assured, our attorneys and team at Stockman & Poropat, PLLC want to make this particular situation as painless as possible for you! That’s our goal, to address all of the allegations at hand, figure out a strategy, and implement it so that you can resolve the matter with relative ease.
Luxottica Alleges Counterfeit Network Resulted in Loss of Revenue | Luxottica Trademark Action Against Online Sellers
Here’s a few excerpts from the Luxottica legal complaint, to help round out the entire series of allegations put forth by the Plaintiff:
E-commerce stores operating under the Seller Aliases look sophisticated and accept payment in U.S. dollars and/or funds from U.S. bank accounts via credit cards, Alipay, Amazon Pay, and/or PayPal. E-commerce stores operating under the Seller Aliases often include content and images that make it very difficult for consumers to distinguish such stores from an authorized retailer.
Plaintiffs have not licensed or authorized Defendants to use any of Plaintiffs’ Trademarks, and none of the Defendants are authorized retailers of genuine Plaintiffs’ Products.
Counterfeit Products for sale by the Seller Aliases bear similar irregularities and indicia of being counterfeit to one another, suggesting that the Counterfeit Products were manufactured by and come from a common source and that Defendants are interrelated.
Defendants also deceive unknowing consumers by using Plaintiffs’ Trademarks without authorization within the content, text, and/or meta tags of their e-commerce stores to attract various search engines crawling the Internet looking for websites relevant to consumer searches for Plaintiffs’ Products.
Contact our team at Stockman & Poropat, PLLC today for a free initial consultation!
Download the legal complaint below:
