Trademark Infringement Lawyer

Trademark infringement requires a likelihood of confusion: the standard asks whether a typical consumer encountering the second mark would likely be confused about the source of the goods or services. Courts apply multi-factor tests that vary by federal circuit. Factors the USPTO weighs under the du Pont test include the similarity of the marks, the relatedness of the goods or services, the channels of trade, and the conditions of purchase, such as buyer sophistication. A trademark lawyer can assess whether what you are seeing meets the legal threshold before you spend money on enforcement.

You do not need a registered trademark to assert infringement: 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) reaches a use likely to cause confusion whether or not the mark is registered. A certificate of registration on the Principal Register is prima facie evidence of the validity of the registered mark, of the registrant's ownership, and of the registrant's exclusive right to use the mark in commerce for the goods or services in the certificate (15 U.S.C. § 1057(b)). Once the mark is registered on the Principal Register, the application filing date counts as constructive use conferring nationwide priority, subject to the exceptions in 15 U.S.C. § 1057(c). Without a registration, you rely on common-law rights, which the USPTO notes are based on use in a particular geographic area. As of November 3, 2026, Amazon Brand Registry requires a pending or registered trademark issued by the designated government trademark office of a country with an Amazon store.

Document what you have found before doing anything else. Screenshots, URLs, product listings, and timestamps create a record of the infringement at the moment of discovery. After that, a trademark lawyer can evaluate whether what you are seeing meets the legal standard, what enforcement options are available, and what the risks are of each approach. Sending an untargeted cease-and-desist before evaluating the strength of your position can sometimes backfire if the other party has grounds to challenge your own rights.

Yes. Amazon Brand Registry and Etsy's IP reporting tool allow trademark owners to submit infringement reports that can result in listing removals and seller account actions. As of November 3, 2026, Amazon Brand Registry enrollment requires an active registered trademark or a pending trademark application. Meta, TikTok, and YouTube have similar reporting mechanisms. We recommend platform enforcement as a first step when the infringement is concentrated on a specific marketplace.

The cost depends on what is required. A cease-and-desist letter that results in compliance is the least expensive outcome. Platform takedown reports are typically low cost if you have a registered trademark. TTAB opposition and cancellation proceedings cost more, and federal court litigation is the most expensive option. Many trademark disputes resolve after a cease-and-desist letter without requiring formal proceedings. I assess the likely cost of each path before we decide which one to pursue.

No. A cease-and-desist letter puts the infringer on notice and gives them an opportunity to comply without formal proceedings. Many infringers do comply, especially when the letter is from a law firm and clearly identifies the legal basis for the demand. Some infringers ignore the letter, deny infringement, or respond with a counter-demand. The letter is a first step, not a guaranteed resolution. If the infringer does not comply, the next steps include TTAB proceedings, platform enforcement, or federal court, depending on the nature of the dispute.

Likelihood of confusion is the legal standard for trademark infringement under the Lanham Act. It asks whether a typical buyer encountering the second mark would likely be confused about whether the goods or services come from the same source as yours. The test considers the similarity of the marks, the proximity of the goods or services, the strength of the original mark, and the sophistication of the relevant buyers.

If the infringer is operating in Canada, I can assess and pursue the matter under Canadian trademark law directly, since I am licensed in Ontario and Quebec. If the infringer is outside Canada and the US, the options depend on where they have trademark registrations, where they are selling, and what platform or domain infrastructure they are using. Platform takedown tools and UDRP domain proceedings are sometimes available regardless of the infringer's location. Cross-border infringement involving markets where neither party has a registration is more complex and may require referral to local counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.

In the US, trademark rights come from use, and if a mark registers on the Principal Register, the filing date counts as nationwide constructive use of the mark for the registered goods or services, except against anyone who has not abandoned their mark and who, before that date, had used it, had filed a US application for it that is pending or registered, or had filed a foreign application giving a right of priority and then timely filed a US application that is pending or registered (15 U.S.C. § 1057(c)). In Canada, an applicant is not entitled to registration if, at the earlier of its filing date and its first use in Canada, the trademark was confusing with a trademark someone else had previously used, made known, or applied for in Canada, or with a trade name previously used in Canada (Trademarks Act, s. 16(1)), unless, on the day the application is advertised, the earlier application is no longer pending or the earlier trademark or trade name has been abandoned (s. 16(2) and (3)). If another party's registration predates your filing and has become incontestable under 15 U.S.C. § 1065, the Lanham Act's prior-use defense applies only if you adopted the name without knowledge of the registrant's prior use and you, or those in privity with you, have used it continuously from a date before the applicable statutory date (the registrant's constructive-use date under 15 U.S.C. § 1057(c); its registration date, if its application was filed before the Trademark Law Revision Act of 1988 took effect; or the date its registered mark was published under 15 U.S.C. § 1062(c)), and only in the area where that continuous prior use is proved (15 U.S.C. § 1115(b)(5)); a registration that has not become incontestable does not preclude you from proving any legal or equitable defense or defect that could have been asserted if the mark had not been registered (15 U.S.C. § 1115(a)). In addition, within five years of the registration date, you can petition the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to cancel the registration on the ground that it is likely to cause confusion with your earlier-used mark (15 U.S.C. § 1064(1)); after five years, a petition to cancel may still be filed at any time on the grounds listed in 15 U.S.C. § 1064(3), such as genericness, functionality, abandonment, or fraudulent procurement, or, once three years have passed since registration, on the ground that the mark has never been used in commerce for some or all of the registered goods or services (15 U.S.C. § 1064(6)).

Under the Lanham Act, a successful trademark infringement plaintiff can recover the defendant's profits, actual damages suffered by the plaintiff, and the costs of the litigation. In cases of willful infringement, the court can award up to three times the actual damages. Attorney's fees can be awarded in exceptional cases. Injunctive relief, requiring the infringer to stop using the mark, is often the most valuable remedy because it stops the ongoing harm rather than just compensating for past damage.