Opinion ID: 1425915
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Vicarious Trademark Infringement

Text: Vicarious liability for trademark infringement requires a finding that the defendant and the infringer have an apparent or actual partnership, have authority to bind one another in transactions with third parties or exercise joint ownership or control over the infringing product. Hard Rock Café Licensing Corp. v. Concession Servs., Inc., 955 F.2d 1143, 1150 (7th Cir.1992) (internal quotations omitted), followed by Symantec Corp. v. CD Micro, Inc., 286 F.Supp.2d 1265, 1275 (D.Or.2003). Perfect 10 argues that Defendants are liable as follows: Defendants and the Stolen Content Websites are in a symbiotic financial partnership pursuant to which the websites operate their businesses according to defendants' rules and regulations and defendants share the profits, transaction by transaction. Appellant's Opening Brief at 40. For the same reasons that this relationship does not establish right and ability to control for copyright purposes, neither does it establish such a symbiotic relationship or joint ownership or control for trademark purposes. Defendants process payments to these websites and collect their usual processing fees, nothing more. Perfect 10 further argues that Defendants' acceptance of a charge binds the Stolen Content Website to provide the infringing images to third parties. Appellant's Opening Brief at 40. Even if legally relevant, Perfect 10's allegation is legally incorrect. It is the websites' contracts with the consumers that bind the websites to provide the infringing images, not the websites' relationship with Defendants. [19] The websites' contracts with Defendants are merely a means of settling the resulting debits and credits among the websites and the relevant consumers. We hold that Perfect 10 fails to state a claim for vicarious trademark infringement.