Luxury Counterfeiting: Dupe or Don’t?

Luxury counterfeit production has soared due to rising prices in the authentic luxury market. Now, luxury brands are fighting back and using the legal system to combat counterfeiters. An average 33% price increase occurred in the luxury market between 2019 and 2023, as consumer demand rose in the wake of the pandemic. (Reuters, Business of Fashion). The classic Chanel “quilted flap bag more than tripled [in price] between 2015 and 2024,” while the popular Louis Vuitton “Keepall travel bag more than doubled.” Id. Consequently, consumers struggled to keep up with rapid price increases, and the counterfeit industry worked to solidify its place in the market by mimicking luxury products. Id.; (Malique Morris, Business of Fashion). Luxury brands, in an effort to protect themselves and their customers, are targeting online retailers and luxury resale stores. Id. This post explores recent and ongoing trademark lawsuits directed at a variety of counterfeit and “dupe” markets, with luxury brands defending their reputations from purposeful copying and disguised counterfeit reselling.

When consumers buy authentic luxury goods, they’re not just buying leather and hardware—they’re buying the brand’s reputation, craftsmanship, and exclusivity. However, counterfeit vendors successfully cater to shoppers’ desires to save money by delivering convincing replicas that can no longer be spotted with the naked eye. (Carol Ryan, The Wall Street Journal). For decades, fake goods were typically found at physical markets, like Canal Street in New York City, and were easily distinguishable from real items. Id. The counterfeit industry is no longer limited to physical markets and vendors, but instead now enjoys a growing presence in e-commerce, making counterfeit items more accessible to consumers. (Malique Morris, Business of Fashion). Available through online platforms, “super-fakes” are a new type of ultra-realistic counterfeits that are priced in the mid-luxury range. Id. As super-fakes further infiltrate the market, luxury brands lose the ability to control the sale of their brand marks and product designs, resulting in dilution of the brand’s reputation and exclusivity. Trademark law attempts to address these problems caused by counterfeiting. 

Trademark law equips luxury brands with the tools to safeguard their intangible value by granting them exclusive rights to their marks. Specifically, the Lanham Act, the federal trademark law, prohibits the unauthorized “[use] in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, . . . which is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation . . . .” 15 U.S.C § 1125. For example, luxury jewelry company Richemont, which owns Van Cleef & Arpels and Cartier, instituted a trademark and trade dress infringement lawsuit against Malidani Jewelry Corp. (Hoffman, et al., White & Case). Richemont alleged Malidani sells super-fake versions of the brands’ well-known designs, like the Cartier “LOVE” bracelets and Van Cleef “Alhambra” collection. Id. Richemont is seeking injunctive relief and monetary damages based on the super-fakes which cause consumer confusion by copying the luxury brands’ source-identifying, protected design elements. Id.

As the battleground for brand protection expands beyond street corners to legitimate e-commerce platforms, even established retailers are not immune. Gucci recently claimed a trademark infringement victory against department store giant Lord & Taylor (“L&T”). (Adam Lidgett, Law360). On October 17, 2025, a New York district court awarded luxury retailer Gucci a $1.3 million judgment in its lawsuit against L&T. Id. Gucci claimed L&T created and sold fake handbags featuring Gucci’s trademarks. Id. Gucci alleged, among other things, “trademark counterfeiting and infringement, false designation of origin, and trademark dilution under the Lanham Act.” (Gucci Am., Inc. v. Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC, No. 23 CIV. 10239 (LGS), 2025 WL 2945707 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2025)). In 2024, the court granted Gucci a default judgment against L&T on its claims, permanently prohibiting L&T from using Gucci’s trademarks and requiring L&T to destroy or turn over the infringing goods to Gucci. Id. E-commerce stores continue the push the boundaries of trademark protection, despite the courts’ low tolerance for trademark violations. 

Large e-commerce retailer Quince is currently facing lawsuits from luxury brands Coach and Williams-Sonoma. (Jonathan Stempel, Reuters). These brands allege that Quince is “brand-washing” its advertisements, promising consumers the same high-quality items offered by these luxury brands, but at a largely discounted price. Id. These “dupes” are different than counterfeits, as they are “look-a-likes” of luxury goods but don’t use brand names. A new era of retailer, like Quince, which is sometimes described as a “dupe” company, may not blatantly use a brand’s name but still cannot escape the reach of luxury brands’ desires to protect their brand image. Id.

While consumers purchasing a replica from a manufacturer or retailer that markets the products as “dupes” likely know they aren’t buying an authentic good, some super-fakes have fooled experienced authenticators and entered the authentic luxury re-sale market. (Richard Kestenbaum, Forbes). These under-the-radar replicas are often exposed when a second-hand purchaser questions the item’s authenticity and goes to an expert for answers. Id. Resellers have some legal protection through the first-sale doctrine, which permits the resale of authentic luxury goods without the registrant’s permission, “so long as the goods have not been materially altered and there is no likelihood of consumer confusion regarding origin, affiliation or endorsement.” (Charles Meyer, Law360). So, authentic luxury resale is mostly immune from trademark infringement claims, but issues arise when these sellers offer counterfeit goods marketed as authentic.

When resale platforms unknowingly sell counterfeits, it subjects them to trademark lawsuits that can’t successfully apply the first-sale doctrine defense because “quality control and misrepresentation” are threatened. (Charles Meyer, Law360). For example, Chanel brought trademark infringement and counterfeiting claims against second-hand luxury retailer, The RealReal. (CHANEL, INC., Plaintiff, v. THE REALREAL, INC., Defendant., No. 18-CV-10626 (VSB), 2026 WL 843256 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2026)). Despite The RealReal’s assertion that it had “the most rigorous authentication process in the marketplace,” Chanel claimed it identified multiple counterfeit Chanel products offered for sale on the RealReal, leading the court to hold that Chanel sufficiently pled trademark infringement. Id. Even though The RealReal was not responsible for creating the counterfeit products, it exercised enough control over the sale of these products that it could be found liable. Id.

The application of trademark law to the expansion of the luxury counterfeit and “dupe” markets may affect the future of luxury resale and copying, as luxury brands will likely continue to enforce their trademark rights. (Charles Meyer, Law360). Though genuine resale platforms are protected by the first sale doctrine, that shield only extends to the sale of authentic goods. Id. Luxury brands could engage in trademark licensing with these resale platforms, but it does not seem that brands are willing to embrace this opportunity, perhaps in an effort to retain as much market control as possible. Id.Despite luxury brands’ litigious attitudes toward these resale platforms and some direct counterfeiters, these lawsuits haven’t quite reached large online counterfeit and super-fake retailers based in China, like DHGate and AliExpress. (Malique Morris, Business of Fashion). While the origin of these counterfeiters makes it difficult for luxury retailers to control that sector of the market, there may be lawsuits to watch for in the future.