March 12, 2025
Rosemberg Law successfully defeated a motion for summary judgment in a contributory trademark infringement lawsuit involving a flea market by demonstrating that its clients’ federally registered trademarks are protected property rights and that infringement of those rights constitutes a concrete injury under Article III of the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida issued an important decision reaffirming that trademarks are legally protected property rights, and that this property status plays a central role in establishing a plaintiff’s standing to sue under the Lanham Act. The ruling highlights a critical principle in trademark infringement litigation: interference with a trademark owner’s right to exclude others constitutes a concrete injury for purposes of Article III standing, even without proof of lost sales, consumer confusion, or measurable economic damages. The court noted that trademark rights have “ancient origins” and have long been recognized at common law as a form of property. Citing historic Supreme Court precedent, the court emphasized that the defining characteristic of a property right is the exclusive right to control and restrict others’ use of the trademark. When third parties use a trademark without authorization, that invasion of exclusivity itself is a concrete, legally cognizable harm. The court held that by demonstrating (1) ownership of valid, registered trademarks and (2) evidence of contributory infringement, the plaintiffs met the constitutional threshold for injury-in-fact. The court also pointed out that statutory damages under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(c) exist precisely because actual damages in cases involving counterfeits can be nearly impossible to quantify, and therefore cannot be a prerequisite for standing.
Overall, the decision reinforces a critical principle for brand owners and companies combating counterfeit goods: trademark rights function as property rights, and infringement of one’s trademark rights can establish actionable harm, regardless of proof of financial loss.