Louis Vuitton has secured an eye-watering damages award in its ongoing battle against counterfeits. In an order last week, a U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia judge issued a default judgment against Westgate Discount Mall Inc., an Atlanta-based indoor flea market long accused of facilitating the sale of counterfeit goods – including fake Louis Vuitton handbags, luggage, and accessories – where authorities once seized a total of eighteen tractor trailer loads of counterfeit and infringing products during a single raid.
At $584 million, the award, which was first reported by TFL, ranks among the largest for a luxury goods brand in a U.S. counterfeiting case (beaten only by a couple of judgments in Schedule A cases), underscoring both the scale of the alleged infringement and the courts’ growing willingness to impose staggering penalties on marketplaces that enable it.
A Flea Market Turned Hotbed for Fakes
In her September 22 order, Judge Victoria Marie Calvert ordered Westgate to pay more than $500 million in statutory damages – a figure that reflects the statutory maximum of $2 million for each of the 292 Louis Vuitton trademarks identified across 44 types of counterfeit goods seized at the mall. The court also granted Louis Vuitton a permanent injunction barring Westgate and its officers from permitting counterfeit sales on the premises.
The $584 million damages award is the latest development in a case that got its start in April 2023 when Louis Vuitton filed suit against Westgate, its owner Basirou Kebbay, and CEO Aaron Kebe for allegedly engaging in contributory trademark infringement by knowingly allowing vendors at the flea market to traffic in counterfeit Louis Vuitton goods.
In its complaint, Louis Vuitton painted a picture of Westgate as a repeat offender that directly benefited from the counterfeiting operations that played out under its roof. Louis Vuitton argued that it sent at least 31 notices to Westgate concerning specific tenants at the market that had attempted to import infringing products to their booth location, but had such products seized by U.S. Customs and Border Protection or that had been observed engaging in the sale or offer for sale of counterfeit products by investigators acting on behalf of Louis Vuitton. The LVMH-owned company also claimed that it had delivered at least 20 cease-and-desist letters directly to Westgate tenants.
Beyond that, Louis Vuitton asserted that local and federal law enforcement had also conducted raids at the Westgate market – including a 2021 joint raid that resulted in the seizure of “eighteen tractor trailer loads” containing more than 250,000 counterfeit products, 72,000 of which bore Louis Vuitton trademarks.
Westgate’s motivation, according to Louis Vuitton, was financial: It “knew or had reason to know [its] tenants were offering for sale [counterfeit] goods” but evicting counterfeit vendors would have gutted its tenant base and impacted its revenue stream. So, instead, the mall reaped the benefits of customer traffic and rental fees, effectively profiting from the counterfeiting taking place.
>> In the Court’s Own Words: Siding with the luxury goods brand, Judge Calvert said that the $584 million damages award is supported by two factors, “Westgate has been subject to court orders to cease facilitating infringement but carried on anyway. Second, the sheer scale of infringement – Louis Vuitton contends that this was one of the largest seizures of its counterfeit goods in United States history.”
As for one outstanding element, the court stated that it will take up arguments previously put forth by Westgate owner Basirou Kebbay when Louis Vuitton brings a motion for default judgment against Kebbay at a later date, noting that Louis Vuitton’s instant motion for default judgment was only sought against Westgate.
The Bigger Picture
This case underscores the willingness of courts to hold landlords and marketplaces contributorily liable for counterfeiting under the Lanham Act. The Eleventh Circuit has previously affirmed that operators who knowingly allow infringement on their premises can face liability, a principle squarely applied here. The judgment also sends a strong deterrent signal: allowing counterfeit sales is not only reputationally damaging but also financially catastrophic. For Louis Vuitton, the ruling is a reminder of its zero-tolerance stance toward counterfeits, a strategy it has pursued aggressively across global markets.
The size of the award is also significant. While luxury brands have secured major wins in counterfeiting cases before – Gucci’s $144.2 million judgment against online counterfeiters in 2013, Hermès’ $100 million default award in 2012, and even Vuitton’s own $32.4 million jury verdict against a web host in 2009 – few, if any, damages awards in this space come close to the $584 million now levied against Westgate. Even Coach v. Goodfellow, a landmark case affirming contributory liability for a flea market owner, resulted in just over $5 million in 2013. Against that backdrop, the Westgate judgment is not only one of the largest in a counterfeiting case, but also unique in being the largest contributory infringement judgment to date and the largest judgment tied to a brick-and-mortar operation in an increasingly digital market.
Still, whether Vuitton will ultimately collect any meaningful amount of the $584 million seems unlikely. Large statutory awards in counterfeiting cases often serve more as symbolic victories than practical recoveries, especially when defendants lack the resources to pay. But paired with the permanent injunction, the judgment marks a significant step in dismantling what Vuitton described as a “hotbed for illicit activity” in Atlanta’s retail landscape.
The case is Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A.S. v. Westgate Discount Mall, Inc. et al., 1:23-cv-01541 (N.D. Ga.).
Share
