In Century 21 Real Estate, LLC v. Destiny Real Estate Properties, et al., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147075 (N.D. Ind. Dec. 19, 2011), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana held that a holdover franchisee’s continued unauthorized use of a franchisor’s trademark constitutes use of a counterfeit mark, which allows the franchisor to seek additional damages and attorneys’ fees and costs under the Lanham Act. To establish counterfeiting, a plaintiff must prove that the mark is identical with or substantially indistinguishable from a registered mark, that the mark is registered with the USPTO, that the defendant is not authorized to use the mark, and that the defendant acted with knowledge and intent.
Century 21 terminated the franchisee for nonpayment of fees and brought suit for trademark infringement after the franchisee continued using the mark following termination. The court noted a circuit split regarding whether holdover use constitutes counterfeiting, including the Sixth Circuit’s express finding that such conduct is not counterfeit use and the Ninth Circuit’s ruling that it is. Relying on the Seventh Circuit’s guidance in a case involving deceptive packaging, the court found that a holdover franchisee is committing counterfeit use of a franchisor’s trademark when it uses the mark after termination. It noted, “The Court can conceive of no reason why an ex-franchisee should escape liability for counterfeiting simply because that person had access to a franchisor’s original marks because of the former relationship and therefore did not need to reproduce an identical or substantially similar mark.”
The information contained in this post is provided to alert you to legal developments and should not be considered legal advice. It is not intended to and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Specific questions about how this information affects your particular situation should be addressed to one of the individuals listed. No representations or warranties are made with respect to this information, including, without limitation, as to its completeness, timeliness, or accuracy, and Lathrop GPM shall not be liable for any decision made in connection with the information. The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely on advertisements.
About this Publication
The Franchise Memorandum is a collection of postings on summaries of recent legal developments of interest to franchisors brought to you by Lathrop GPM LLP.
To subscribe to monthly emails for The Franchise Memorandum, please click here.