The 8th Circuit recently "clarified" the showing necessary to recover monetary remedies under the Lanham Act. In Masters v. UHS of Delaware, the court held that evidence of actual confusion is not a prerequisite to the recovery of monetary damages. This recent decision reflects a more fact-specific approach toward the recovery of damages and a move away from bright line damage rules. The decision also recognizes that infringement can impact the overall value of a mark, supporting a monetary award even where the trademark holder has not suffered any identifiable lost sales.
Trademark Infringement under The Lanham Act