Cease-and-Desist Response
& Defense

Sending a cease-and-desist on the trademark side is a different engagement than responding to one. SGL handles the sending side under Trademark Enforcement & Cease-and-Desist, which covers brand-protection enforcement letters, evidence packages, and post-letter negotiation. This page covers the response side only, what to do when a letter arrives at your business or in your inbox. If your situation is enforcement against an infringer, route to the sibling page; if you have received a letter, the rest of this page applies.

We recommend that you not pay or admit anything before the claim is reviewed, and that you preserve evidence of how you sourced the image, your license history, and any platform metadata. The response strategy depends on whether the work is registered with the U.S. Copyright Office, when registration occurred, and whether your use qualifies as fair use under 17 U.S.C. § 107. For broader DMCA-driven copyright disputes including troll demand letters, see DMCA Counter-Notice & Demand Letter Response.

Both at the same time. The platform takedown and the legal response run on different clocks and need different documents. Your platform appeal addresses the policy claim that triggered Brand Registry or VeRO removal. Your legal response addresses the underlying IP claim that led the rights-holder to file the complaint in the first place. Reinstating the listing without resolving the underlying claim risks re-takedown on the next complaint cycle. SGL handles the legal response side here; the platform-side reinstatement work lives at Platform Account Reinstatement & Appeals.

Read it, preserve everything, and do not respond yet. We recommend reading the deadline in the letter and evaluating the claim with counsel before it passes. Save the letter, all envelopes, all metadata, and any related communications. Take screenshots of the activity the letter complains about, but do not edit, delete, or alter anything before getting advice. A premature reply can lock you into the wrong concession; silence past the deadline is also a position the sender will use against you.

Under subsection (a) of 15 U.S.C. § 1117, a court may, in exceptional cases, award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party; the damages and profits remedies are subject to the statute's conditions. We recommend having counsel evaluate the letter before its deadline rather than ignoring it.

Several, depending on your facts. Senior use means you used the mark before the sender did, which can give you superior rights even without registration. Fair use covers descriptive use of common terms and nominative use when referencing the sender's product. In the Ninth Circuit, likelihood of confusion is assessed under the eight-factor test of AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats (the Sleekcraft factors). Each defense requires evidence, not just argument.

It depends on the facts. We recommend considering settlement when the claim has clear merit, the demand is proportional, and the cost of fighting exceeds the cost of paying, and not settling when the claim is overbroad or the settlement language would lock you into concessions that affect future business.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2201, in a case of actual controversy within its jurisdiction, a federal court may declare the rights and other legal relations of an interested party seeking that declaration. Venue must satisfy the applicable venue statute, including 28 U.S.C. § 1391. If a declaratory-judgment action is the right path, we draft the written legal opinion that supports the strategy; the filing work is scoped separately.

It depends on what response the situation actually needs. Multi-round negotiation, coexistence drafting, or settlement structuring scales with complexity. SGL's flat-fee tiers above describe what each engagement covers; the strategy call sets which tier fits.

A credible letter cites a real legal basis, names a specific registration or right, and identifies how your conduct violates it. Look for: a federal trademark or copyright registration number you can verify through the USPTO Trademark Search system or Copyright.gov, specific factual allegations rather than vague claims, and a sender that is identifiable as a real attorney or rights-holder. A claim-merit review separates real letters from pressure tactics.