U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- On Tuesday, September 15, 2020, a Federal Judge for The United States District Court, Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, issued a decision in the case of GLOCK, INC. v. THE WUSTER INC., d/b/a AIRSPLAT.COM, Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-00568. The Defendant operated AirSplat retail locations and an Internet retail store at AirSplat.com that sold airsoft guns and related products. The Court’s decision yesterday ended a six and a half year lawsuit between the parties in favor of GLOCK.
In February of 2014, GLOCK filed a multi-count complaint against the Defendant for trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, and related claims under federal and state law.
The Defendant imported Glock Replicas, marketed, advertised for sale, and did sell the Glock Replicas using GLOCK’s trade dress and trademarks. The Court found that the Defendant “intended to, and did, create actual market confusion in the minds of the consumers as to whether they were genuine or licensed GLOCK products, in violation of Glock’s registered trade dress and legally protected rights.”
The Court found the Defendant liable to GLOCK for the following:
- Infringement of GLOCK’s registered trademarks and trade dress in violation of the Federal Lanham Act;
- Unfair competition in violation of Georgia statutory and common law; and
- Unjust enrichment in violation of George common law.
The Court awarded monetary damages to GLOCK totaling $ 2,253,078.28, consisting of:
- Disgorgement of the Defendant’s profits realized from selling infringing Glock Replicas;
- Pre-Judgement interest; and
- Attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses.
The Court also awarded a Permanent Injunction to GLOCK prohibiting Defendant and various other persons from selling GLOCK replica pistols in the future or otherwise infringing GLOCK’s trademarks or trade dress.
“This is a resounding victory for GLOCK against a seller of replica airsoft products,” said Carlos Guevara, Vice President and General Counsel of GLOCK, Inc. “This ruling puts potential infringers like Airsplat on notice that GLOCK will vigorously prosecute its intellectual property rights against those who would infringe.”
About GLOCK, Inc.
GLOCK is a leading global manufacturer of firearms. The simple, safe design of GLOCK’s polymer-based pistols revolutionized the firearms industry and made GLOCK pistols a favorite of military and law enforcement agencies worldwide and among pistol owners. In 2020, GLOCK celebrates its 34th Anniversary in the United States. Renowned for featuring three safeties, GLOCK pistols offer users of every lifestyle confidence they can rely on. GLOCK, Inc. is based in Smyrna, Georgia. For more information, please visit us.glock.com.
About GSSF
The GLOCK Sport Shooting Foundation is a safe, fun, family-oriented organization devoted to the responsible use of GLOCK firearms and encouraging participation in the shooting sports. Competitions, across the United States provide opportunities for shooters of all skill levels and experience to compete together in simple, but challenging courses of fire. Founded in 1991, GSSF has grown to include over 100,000 members and now organizes more than 50 outdoor and over 300 indoor shooting matches each year. For more information, visit https://www.gssfonline.com.
This is interesting but a $2.2 million dollar settlement after six years probably doesn’t leave much after legal fees. It might have made more sense to do a licensing agreement, much like Remington does with the 1911 CO2 powered BB gun. Which was a decent way to practice drawing and firing during the Covid gun range shut down. Maybe the airsoft outfit didn’t want to do that. I get the impression that often in law suits only the lawyers come out ahead. One man sues, two lawyers get paid.
Glock has something worth a ton of money now. They have case precedent that will force similar companies to approach Glock and seek a licensing agreement in order to offer similar looking toys. In fact, it is likely that the case here will be resolved with such a licensing agreement, rather than the payment of the full judgment.
The settlement included “Attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses”.
My wife and I went through a lawsuit for 3 1/2 yrs. In the end, they settled for what we offered in the beginning. The lawyers made lots of money and we got screwed by the ones that were supposed to be helping us. They are all a bunch of snakes in my opinion.
What’s the difference between a dead snake and a dead lawyer laying on the road?
Answer: There are. Skid marks before the snake!
What’s the best way to get a lawyer down from a tree?
Cut the rope!
Wrong! Unlike the pile of shit, you have to compost the lawyer before you can use it for fertilizer.
I wouldn’t put lawyer compost on MY garden! Like as not it would only grow weeds. 🙂
Q: What is a trainload of lawyers on the bottom of the ocean?
A: A good start!