Celebrities, athletes, musicians, influencers, and other public figures can take legal action against unauthorized merchandise in appropriate circumstances, but the correct enforcement strategy depends on what the seller actually copied.

A product does not become legally counterfeit merely because it was sold without permission.

An unauthorized shirt might infringe a registered trademark, create a false impression of celebrity endorsement, copy copyrighted artwork, violate state name, image, and likeness rights, or combine several of those problems. Counterfeiting is a narrower trademark concept involving a spurious mark that is identical to, or substantially indistinguishable from, a registered trademark.

The first steps should therefore be to preserve evidence, identify the rights involved, confirm ownership and registrations, determine who is operating the merchandise business, and select an enforcement method that matches the conduct.

What Is the Difference Between Unauthorized and Counterfeit Merchandise?

Unauthorized merchandise is a broad commercial category. Counterfeit merchandise has a more specific legal meaning.

An unauthorized seller might place a celebrity’s name on a shirt without permission, use an athlete’s photograph, reproduce a musician’s catchphrase, imitate official packaging, or operate a storefront that suggests affiliation with the public figure.

Those acts can potentially create legal claims without necessarily constituting counterfeiting.

Under the Lanham Act, a “counterfeit” is a spurious mark that is identical with, or substantially indistinguishable from, a registered trademark.

For certain specialized counterfeit remedies, federal law further focuses on counterfeit use of a mark registered on the USPTO’s Principal Register for the relevant goods or services and in use.

That distinction matters because federal counterfeiting provisions can provide remedies beyond those ordinarily available in a conventional trademark dispute.

A personal brand should therefore avoid labeling every unauthorized product “counterfeit” without first determining whether the statutory definition is actually satisfied.

What Rights Can Unauthorized Merchandise Violate?

One unauthorized product can potentially implicate several different rights.

Trademark law may protect a person’s name, professional name, nickname, logo, signature, catchphrase, or another identifier when consumers recognize it as identifying the source or authorization of commercial goods or services.

The USPTO’s 2026 Name, Image, and Likeness guidance expressly recognizes names, nicknames, images, voices, catchphrases, signatures, and similar personal identifiers as potential parts of a commercial brand.

Copyright can separately protect original photographs, illustrations, graphic artwork, and other sufficiently creative visual works. The Copyright Office identifies photographs and other pictorial and graphic works as protectable visual art.

State NIL or right-of-publicity laws may create additional rights concerning unauthorized commercial exploitation of a person’s identity.

The strongest enforcement strategy identifies each copied element separately rather than calling the entire dispute a “trademark case.”

Can an Unregistered Personal Brand Stop Unauthorized Merchandise?

Potentially.

Federal registration provides substantial enforcement advantages, but the absence of a registration does not automatically mean that a public figure has no trademark-based claim.

Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act creates a federal cause of action against certain uses of names, symbols, devices, and misleading representations that are likely to confuse consumers concerning affiliation, connection, association, origin, sponsorship, or approval.

That language can be particularly important in personal-brand disputes.

An unauthorized seller may not literally claim “official merchandise,” yet the product page, branding, store name, advertising, packaging, or presentation may create the impression that the celebrity or athlete sponsored or approved the merchandise.

The specific facts determine whether a viable federal claim exists.

Why Is Federal Trademark Registration Valuable for Merchandise Enforcement?

Registration makes several issues easier to establish and communicate.

For registered trademarks, 15 U.S.C. §1114 prohibits certain unauthorized uses of reproductions, counterfeits, copies, or colorable imitations of registered marks when the use is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception.

A federal registration also creates a readily identifiable public record of the mark, owner, and covered goods or services.

That can be valuable when submitting marketplace complaints, communicating with retailers, negotiating with sellers, pursuing border enforcement, or bringing litigation.

The registration still needs to cover commercially relevant goods.

A celebrity registration for personal appearances does not automatically become direct registration coverage for shirts, hats, posters, or jewelry.

Personal brands with substantial merchandise businesses should therefore review whether their federal portfolio actually covers the products most vulnerable to unauthorized sales.

Can a Fake Celebrity Store Create a False-Endorsement Claim?

Potentially.

Section 43(a) specifically addresses conduct likely to cause confusion regarding affiliation, connection, association, sponsorship, or approval.

That makes the overall commercial presentation important.

Consider a website designed to look like an athlete’s official merchandise store. It uses the athlete’s name prominently, imitates official branding, describes products in language suggesting a collaboration, and uses social media advertising that appears to come from the athlete.

Even if the seller avoids copying one federally registered logo exactly, the overall presentation may still create a materially different legal issue from a website that clearly identifies its products as unrelated commentary or fan-created material.

The relevant question is how customers are likely to understand the seller’s commercial message.

What Should a Personal Brand Do Before Reporting Unauthorized Merchandise?

Preserve the evidence first.

Online merchandise can disappear or change immediately after a complaint is submitted.

The brand should preserve the complete product listing, including the URL, date, seller identity, price, product description, photographs, ordering information, reviews, statements concerning authenticity, and any other features suggesting authorization.

Advertising should also be preserved.

That can include social media posts, paid advertisements, influencer promotions, videos, search results, emails, and marketplace storefront pages.

If commercially justified, purchasing a sample can preserve the physical product, packaging, labels, return address, manufacturer information, shipping records, and other details that may not appear online.

The evidence should reflect what consumers actually encountered before the seller received notice of the dispute.

What Evidence Should the Celebrity or Athlete Preserve About Their Own Brand?

The rights holder should maintain an enforcement file covering its own ownership and use.

That may include federal trademark registrations, applications, first-use materials, licensing agreements, official merchandise photographs, product labels, sales records, advertisements, copyright registrations, artwork assignments, website archives, and documentation identifying authorized manufacturers and retailers.

This becomes especially important when several companies participate in the merchandise operation.

For example, Personal Brand IP LLC might own the trademark, license it to Merchandise LLC, and authorize an outside company to manufacture the products.

An enforcement complaint is stronger when the ownership and licensing chain makes clear why the party submitting the complaint has authority to act.

Should the Brand Investigate the Seller Before Sending a Takedown?

Usually.

One marketplace username may represent a larger commercial operation.

The seller might use several storefronts, its own website, a print-on-demand supplier, a fulfillment company, payment processors, overseas manufacturers, distributors, or multiple social media accounts.

The brand should gather available information concerning business names, addresses, domain records, return information, payment descriptors, product labels, and other commercial identifiers.

Otherwise, removing one listing may simply cause the same seller to reopen under another account.

Identifying the broader operation also helps the rights holder determine whether the problem is an isolated fan seller, an expired licensee, a domestic commercial business, or an organized counterfeiting operation.

Should You Use a Trademark or Copyright Platform Complaint?

Use the right that actually matches the copied material.

If the merchandise uses a protected name or logo in a way that suggests official source or authorization, a trademark complaint may be appropriate.

If the seller copied an original photograph, illustration, or graphic design, copyright may provide the more direct claim.

If the storefront impersonates the public figure or official business, the platform’s impersonation procedure may be relevant.

A brand should not submit a copyright complaint merely because a person’s name or catchphrase appears on a shirt. Names and short phrases generally are not protected by copyright.

Likewise, copied artwork should not automatically be described only as a trademark problem when copyright provides a more precise theory.

Accurate complaints are easier for platforms to evaluate and less vulnerable to challenge.

Does Removing One Marketplace Listing Solve the Problem?

Not necessarily.

Marketplace enforcement is often useful, but it addresses the particular platform or listing.

The seller may continue through another marketplace, standalone website, social media account, physical retailer, convention vendor, or distributor.

A coordinated strategy may therefore combine platform complaints with direct legal correspondence, retailer notices, trademark proceedings, copyright enforcement, litigation, domain action, and Customs recordation.

The appropriate level of escalation should correspond to the commercial threat.

When Should a Personal Brand Send a Cease-and-Desist Letter?

A cease-and-desist letter can be useful when the seller is identifiable and the rights holder wants a resolution broader than removing one listing.

The letter can identify the relevant registered and unregistered trademarks, copyrighted material, licensing rights, and misleading commercial activity.

Depending on the facts, the requested resolution might include stopping production, removing listings and advertising, identifying suppliers, withdrawing a trademark application, accounting for remaining inventory, preserving records, and confirming that additional merchandise will not be distributed.

The scope should be proportionate.

A sophisticated operation copying official labels and authentication features presents a different problem from an individual seller who misunderstood where fan merchandise crosses into legally problematic conduct.

The demand should remain focused on rights the brand can actually support.

What if the Unauthorized Seller Files a Trademark Application?

The application should be investigated promptly.

An unauthorized seller, former merchandise partner, manager, sponsor, or licensee might seek federal registration of a celebrity’s name, nickname, logo, slogan, or merchandise brand.

If the application remains pending, a Trademark Trial and Appeal Board opposition may eventually be available.

If the mark has already registered, a cancellation proceeding may be possible depending on the facts and available grounds.

The TTAB’s jurisdiction is limited to federal registration rights. The USPTO expressly states that the Board cannot decide infringement, award money damages, or issue an injunction preventing marketplace use.

This means a TTAB proceeding may solve the registration problem without stopping the seller’s merchandise business.

Can the TTAB Order Unauthorized Merchandise to Be Removed?

No.

The TTAB does not have authority to order a seller to stop selling products.

It determines whether an applicant is entitled to federal registration or whether an existing registration should remain registered. It cannot determine ordinary trademark infringement, issue marketplace injunctions, or award damages.

If the personal brand’s objective is to stop ongoing commercial sales, other remedies may be needed.

That may include settlement, platform enforcement, a cease-and-desist demand, or litigation.

When Does a Federal Lawsuit Become Appropriate?

Litigation may become appropriate when unauthorized merchandise is widespread, the seller refuses to stop, customer confusion is substantial, a major commercial launch is threatened, or the rights holder needs remedies unavailable through platforms or the TTAB.

Registered-trademark infringement can be pursued under 15 U.S.C. §1114, while Section 43(a) addresses certain false designation and false-endorsement conduct.

The USPTO explains that successful trademark plaintiffs may potentially obtain injunctive and monetary relief depending on the claims and circumstances.

The practical decision to litigate should consider the scale of the operation, evidence, defendant identity, commercial harm, enforceability of any judgment, and the specific remedy the brand needs.

What Special Remedies Are Available in Counterfeit Trademark Cases?

Federal law provides specialized remedies when the statutory counterfeiting requirements are satisfied.

One of the most powerful is the possibility of an ex parte seizure order.

Under 15 U.S.C. §1116(d), a federal court may, in qualifying counterfeit cases and upon satisfaction of detailed statutory requirements, authorize seizure of counterfeit goods, counterfeit marks, production materials, and certain relevant records without advance notice to the accused party.

The remedy is deliberately demanding.

The applicant must satisfy multiple statutory findings, including likelihood of success, immediate and irreparable injury, inadequacy of lesser relief, location of the materials, and risk that the defendant would hide, move, destroy, or make the property inaccessible if given advance notice.

A rights holder should therefore not assume that every unauthorized merchandise case supports an ex parte seizure request.

What Are the Statutory Damages for Trademark Counterfeiting?

In a qualifying counterfeit-mark case, the trademark owner may elect statutory damages instead of proving actual damages and profits.

As of 2026, 15 U.S.C. §1117(c) authorizes an award of $1,000 to $200,000 per counterfeit mark per type of goods or services as the court considers just.

If the court finds the counterfeit use was willful, the maximum increases to $2 million per counterfeit mark per type of goods or services.

These amounts are significant, but they do not apply merely because a seller lacked permission.

The plaintiff must satisfy the statutory counterfeit requirements.

Conventional trademark infringement, false endorsement, copyright infringement, and publicity-right claims have their own standards and remedies.

Why Should Personal Brands Avoid Calling Every Unauthorized Product Counterfeit?

Because overstatement can weaken an otherwise legitimate enforcement position.

The Lanham Act gives “counterfeit” a specific legal meaning.

Suppose an unofficial seller creates completely different artwork containing an athlete’s unregistered nickname.

The product may still present serious questions involving common-law trademark rights, false endorsement, NIL rights, or other claims.

But calling the product a counterfeit may inaccurately suggest that the seller used a spurious mark identical or substantially indistinguishable from an applicable registered trademark.

Precise terminology helps the brand choose the strongest claim.

Can Copyright Help Stop Unauthorized Merchandise?

Yes, especially when the seller copies official visual content.

Celebrity and athlete merchandise frequently uses original photographs, illustrations, album art, signature graphics, character designs, or elaborate logos.

The Copyright Office recognizes photographs and other pictorial and graphic works as copyrightable visual-art categories when they contain sufficient original authorship.

Copyright can be especially useful when the seller avoids copying the registered word trademark but reproduces an official photograph or merchandise graphic almost exactly.

The personal brand should first confirm that it actually owns the copyright.

Does Paying a Photographer or Designer Mean the Celebrity Owns the Copyright?

Not automatically.

The Copyright Office explains that the person who creates visual art is generally the initial author and copyright owner unless an applicable exception such as work made for hire applies.

Copyright transfers also have a formal requirement.

Section 204 provides that a transfer of copyright ownership generally must be in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or an authorized agent.

A celebrity brand that paid an outside photographer or illustrator should therefore review its agreement before asserting that it owns the copyright.

Possession of the high-resolution files or payment of an invoice does not automatically answer the ownership question.

Can Trademark and Copyright Claims Apply to the Same Merchandise?

Yes.

One shirt can create several separate issues.

An unauthorized seller could reproduce a registered celebrity logo, copy a copyrighted illustration, and advertise the product as official merchandise.

The registered logo might support trademark claims.

The illustration might support copyright claims.

The presentation suggesting authorization might implicate false endorsement under Section 43(a).

State NIL or right-of-publicity law might add another theory.

Separating those claims makes enforcement more precise and provides fallback options if one right proves weaker than expected.

What Role Do NIL and Right-of-Publicity Laws Play?

NIL and trademark rights overlap but are not identical.

The USPTO explains that NIL can include a person’s name, nickname, image, voice, catchphrase, and signature move. It also explains that personality rights are largely protected under state law rather than through a single federal personality-rights statute.

A public figure might therefore object to an unauthorized commercial use of their likeness even when the specific image is not itself a federally registered trademark.

Federal trademark law becomes particularly relevant when the identifier is used commercially as a source indicator or when the seller creates confusion regarding sponsorship, affiliation, or approval.

A comprehensive merchandise-enforcement strategy should consider both systems.

Can Federal Trademark Registration Help With NIL Enforcement?

Yes, when the person’s identity is being used as a trademark.

The USPTO’s 2026 NIL guidance recommends registering important trademarks to strengthen takedown requests and negotiations with platforms or unauthorized sellers.

The agency also recommends maintaining evidence of commercial brand use and monitoring websites, social media, and marketplaces for unauthorized activity.

Registration does not replace state NIL rights.

It creates another set of federal rights when the person’s name or other identifier functions as a commercial trademark.

How Does AI Affect Unauthorized Merchandise?

Generative AI makes it possible for sellers to create new unauthorized depictions without copying an existing photograph pixel for pixel.

A seller could generate an artificial image of an athlete, fabricate a celebrity endorsement, create a synthetic promotional video, or imitate a public figure’s voice.

The USPTO’s current NIL guidance specifically recommends monitoring for AI-generated uses and addressing AI-generated depictions and digital replicas in contracts and licenses.

Trademark, NIL, copyright, false-endorsement, platform, and other rules may apply differently depending on what was generated and how it is used.

The enforcement analysis should focus on the actual commercial presentation rather than treating every AI-generated depiction as the same legal violation.

Can U.S. Customs Stop Imported Counterfeit Celebrity Merchandise?

Potentially.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection operates an e-Recordation program through which eligible trademark and copyright owners can obtain border-enforcement assistance.

CBP states that it may detain, seize, forfeit, and ultimately destroy certain merchandise seeking entry into the United States when it bears infringing trademarks or copyrights that have been appropriately registered and recorded with the agency.

For trademarks, CBP requires a valid registration on the USPTO Principal Register.

As of 2026, CBP lists a $190 e-Recordation fee per International Class of goods for trademarks.

This can be particularly useful when a personal brand faces repeated importation of counterfeit apparel, accessories, collectibles, or other merchandise manufactured abroad.

What Information Should a Brand Give CBP?

Brand owners can help Customs distinguish legitimate merchandise from counterfeits.

CBP encourages rights holders to provide information concerning authentic products and their distinguishing characteristics.

For a personal brand, useful information may include authorized manufacturers, licensees, countries of production, product designs, labels, packaging, authentication features, and characteristics distinguishing genuine merchandise from suspicious goods.

The more organized the official licensing program is, the easier this information can be to maintain.

How Can Licensing Make Unauthorized-Merchandise Enforcement Easier?

Clear licensing creates a documented boundary between authorized and unauthorized products.

A merchandise agreement should identify the marks and artwork being licensed, permitted products, territory, duration, distribution channels, quality standards, and approval procedures.

The agreement should also define post-termination rights.

An expired licensee selling previously authorized remaining inventory presents a different issue from an expired licensee that continues manufacturing new merchandise after its rights end.

Maintaining a current list of manufacturers, licensees, and approved retailers can therefore become part of the enforcement system itself.

Should Official Merchandise Use Authentication Features?

For brands facing substantial counterfeiting, consistent authenticity indicators can be commercially useful.

These might include recurring labels, packaging conventions, approved seller lists, serialized elements, official-store messaging, or other features appropriate for the business.

The purpose is not only consumer convenience.

Consistent official branding can also help investigators, platforms, retailers, Customs personnel, and courts understand what legitimate products look like.

The specific authentication strategy should be designed around the merchandise category and scale of the counterfeiting problem.

Does a Public Figure Have the Right to Stop Every Shirt Using Their Name or Image?

No.

Personal-brand enforcement has limits.

Trademark law focuses primarily on source-identifying commercial uses and confusion concerning source, sponsorship, affiliation, connection, or approval.

Federal dilution law also contains exclusions covering certain fair use, commentary, criticism, parody, and news-related activity under specified circumstances.

Merchandise can also raise questions involving expressive rights and state publicity laws.

A shirt marketed as the celebrity’s “official collection” presents a different issue from merchandise whose apparent purpose is criticism or commentary and that does not suggest authorization.

Enforcement should therefore analyze the complete context.

What Is the Best Enforcement Sequence for Unauthorized Merchandise?

The strongest sequence usually begins with evidence rather than an immediate takedown.

First, preserve the listing, advertisements, transaction information, and if appropriate, a physical product.

Second, identify the copied assets and determine whether the strongest rights arise from registered trademarks, common-law trademark rights, false endorsement, copyright, NIL rights, or several theories.

Third, confirm ownership and gather the relevant registrations, assignments, and licenses.

Fourth, investigate the seller and determine whether the conduct is isolated or part of a broader operation.

Only then should the brand select the appropriate response, which might range from monitoring or a focused platform report to a cease-and-desist letter, TTAB action, Customs recordation, negotiated resolution, or litigation.

The objective should drive the remedy.

Frequently Asked Questions About Unauthorized Celebrity Merchandise

Is all unauthorized celebrity merchandise counterfeit?

No. Federal law defines a counterfeit as a spurious mark identical with, or substantially indistinguishable from, a registered trademark. Unauthorized merchandise can create other trademark, false-endorsement, copyright, NIL, or contractual issues without satisfying that definition.

Can a celebrity stop someone from selling merchandise with their name?

Potentially. The answer depends on how the name is used, the celebrity’s trademark and other rights, and whether the product creates confusion concerning source, sponsorship, affiliation, or approval.

Can an athlete stop unauthorized shirts using their nickname?

Potentially, particularly when the nickname functions as a trademark or the product falsely suggests authorization. State NIL or publicity rights may also become relevant.

Can you enforce a personal brand without a federal trademark registration?

Potentially. Section 43(a) can address certain misleading commercial uses involving affiliation, sponsorship, or approval, and common-law trademark rights may exist through use.

Can copied celebrity photographs be removed under copyright law?

Potentially, if the photograph is copyright protected and the enforcing party owns or controls the relevant rights. Photography is recognized by the Copyright Office as visual art, but ownership should be confirmed before enforcement.

Can a merchandise seller register the celebrity’s trademark?

A seller can attempt to file an application, but the personal brand may have grounds to challenge registration depending on ownership, priority, living-person consent, likelihood of confusion, and other applicable issues.

Can the TTAB stop an unauthorized merchandise seller?

No. The TTAB determines federal registration rights. It does not decide infringement, award damages, or issue injunctions stopping marketplace sales.

Can a court seize counterfeit merchandise?

Potentially. Section 1116(d) authorizes ex parte seizure in qualifying counterfeiting cases when strict statutory requirements are met.

What damages are available for trademark counterfeiting?

A qualifying plaintiff may elect statutory damages of $1,000 to $200,000 per counterfeit mark per type of goods or services, with a maximum of $2 million per mark per type when the use is willful.

Can Customs seize counterfeit celebrity merchandise?

Potentially. Qualifying federal trademark and copyright rights can be recorded with CBP for border-enforcement purposes.

Does trademark registration stop every fan-created product?

No. Each product must be evaluated in context. Trademark, expressive-use, parody, commentary, copyright, and publicity-right principles may lead to different outcomes depending on how the merchandise is presented.

Final Thoughts

Protecting a personal brand from unauthorized merchandise requires more than repeatedly submitting takedown requests.

The first question is what right has actually been violated.

An exact reproduction of a registered logo on competing merchandise may potentially present a counterfeit trademark issue. A store implying that an athlete authorized its products may raise false-endorsement concerns. A copied official illustration may create a copyright claim. Unauthorized commercial use of a person’s identity can also involve state NIL or publicity rights.

The second question is what outcome the brand needs.

A platform complaint may remove one listing. A cease-and-desist letter may resolve a broader seller relationship. A TTAB proceeding may address an unauthorized trademark application but cannot stop marketplace use. Federal litigation can potentially provide injunctive and monetary relief. Qualifying counterfeit cases can involve special statutory damages and seizure procedures.

For brands facing imported counterfeit merchandise, CBP recordation can add another layer of enforcement by helping Customs identify infringing goods before they enter the U.S. marketplace.

The most effective system therefore combines federal registrations, accurate ownership records, copyright documentation, carefully structured licenses, marketplace monitoring, evidence preservation, and proportionate enforcement.

The objective is not to prevent every person from mentioning a celebrity, athlete, musician, or public figure.

It is to make clear which merchandise is genuinely official, prevent commercially misleading uses of the personal brand, and preserve the goodwill that consumers associate with authorized products.

Primary Authorities and Sources

15 U.S.C. §1127 defines a counterfeit as a spurious mark identical with, or substantially indistinguishable from, a registered trademark.

15 U.S.C. §1114 addresses unauthorized use of reproductions, counterfeits, copies, and colorable imitations of registered trademarks in circumstances likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception.

15 U.S.C. §1125(a) addresses false designations and misleading commercial uses likely to create confusion concerning affiliation, connection, association, sponsorship, or approval.

15 U.S.C. §1116(d) establishes specialized ex parte seizure procedures for qualifying counterfeit-mark cases and imposes detailed prerequisites before such an order may issue.

15 U.S.C. §1117(c) permits statutory damages of $1,000 to $200,000 per counterfeit mark per type of goods or services and up to $2 million per mark per type for willful counterfeiting.

The USPTO’s 2026 Name, Image, and Likeness guidance addresses personal-brand trademark protection, common-law rights, unauthorized commercial use, marketplace monitoring, and AI-generated impersonation. The USPTO published the guidance on March 26, 2026 and last updated it August 21, 2026.

The USPTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board guidance confirms that the TTAB determines federal registration rights but cannot decide infringement, award damages, or issue marketplace injunctions.

The U.S. Copyright Office’s Visual Arts guidance recognizes photographs and other pictorial and graphic works as potentially copyrightable visual works.

17 U.S.C. §204 generally requires a transfer of copyright ownership to be documented in a writing signed by the copyright owner or authorized agent.

Current U.S. Customs and Border Protection guidance describes e-Recordation of qualifying trademarks and copyrights and CBP’s authority to detain, seize, forfeit, and destroy qualifying infringing imports.

About the Author

Abraham Cohn is Managing Partner of Cohn Legal, PLLC and heads the firm’s Intellectual Property and Transactional Group. His practice includes intellectual property protection, trademark prosecution, licensing, enforcement, and counseling involving brands, content, and persona rights.