Trademark Attorney New York City Addresses Seller Advertise

The disputed posts were created independently by third-party resellers and referenced or compared competing brands.

Trademark Attorney New York City noted that the client neither commissioned nor paid for these posts.

Despite this, the competitor claimed the posts should be treated as the client’s advertising activity.

The competitor sent multiple cease-and-desist letters asserting potential criminal liability.

Trademark Attorney New York City recognized that the allegations were designed to pressure the client into concession.

Immediate legal assessment was required to prevent escalation.

Trademark Attorney New York City analyzed whether the posts constituted advertising conducted by the client.

Under New York law, advertising liability generally requires direction, authorization, or acceptance of benefit.

Independent reseller activity without instruction or approval does not meet this standard.

Trademark Attorney New York City also examined whether criminal liability could arise.

Absent evidence that the client directed or endorsed the content, the elements of criminal trademark misuse or false advertising were not satisfied.

This distinction was critical to the defense strategy.

Trademark Attorney New York City explained that trademark “use” requires the defendant to employ the mark for its own commercial activity.

Here, reseller-created posts were not attributable to the client’s business conduct.

Accordingly, unfair competition claims lacked a legal foundation.

Trademark Attorney New York City further assessed false advertising exposure.

Advertising liability attaches to a business only when it controls or commissions the message.

Independent reseller speech does not qualify as the client’s representation.

The client responded by clearly stating it did not create or authorize the disputed posts.

Trademark Attorney New York City advised against disclosing internal advertising contracts to the competitor.

Such materials were preserved solely for potential investigative authorities if needed.

Trademark Attorney New York City emphasized that the client had already initiated legal action against unauthorized resellers.

This demonstrated that the client was not a beneficiary of the misconduct but a victim.

This framing was central to risk containment.

By clarifying attribution principles and preserving evidence, the client avoided unnecessary investigative exposure.

Trademark Attorney New York City positioned the client defensively without concession.

The competitor’s pressure tactics lost effectiveness.

This case illustrates common risks in online reseller ecosystems.

Trademark Attorney New York City highlights the importance of distinguishing independent reseller conduct from brand-controlled advertising.

Clear internal structures are essential for liability prevention.

Trademark Attorney New York City at SJKP advises brands on trademark enforcement, online advertising risk, and third-party attribution issues.

By aligning legal analysis with real-world distribution practices, SJKP helps clients prevent responsibility for unauthorized third-party conduct.

If your business faces trademark or advertising claims arising from reseller activity, SJKP can provide strategic guidance grounded in New York law.