September 14, 2020
DIC’s complaint alleges that, pursuant to the terms of thelicensing
agreements, DIC successfully created, developed, and marketed the Trollz, simultaneously attempting to reinvigorate sales of the Good Luck Troll. Before entering into the licensing agreements, however, DIC alleges that it expressed concern about the sale of counterfeit Good Luck Trolls and other infringing products, since such knock-off products threatened to undermine the value of the both the Classic Trolls and the Trollz.
In response, DIC alleges, TC repeatedly assured DIC that TC had been vigilant in stamping out any counterfeits and other infringingproducts and, indeed, expressly represented and warranted that, at the time the parties entered into the licensing agreements, TC was not aware of any infringement of the Good Luck Trolls.
DIC alleges that, at the time that TC made these representations to DIC, TC knew that the Good Luck Troll was the subject of widespread infringement, with unauthorized sales of counterfeit trolls persisting on a global scale. DIC alleges that, in reliance on TC’s fraud, DIC devoted years of painstaking effort and nearly $20 million to develop and promote the Good Luck Troll and Trollz properties, whose value had (without DIC’s knowledge) been compromised by rampant infringement.
DIC’s lawsuit seeks damages of approximately $20 million, plus attorney fees and punitive damages.
Subscribe and receive the latest news from the industry.
Join 62,000+ members. Yes, it’s completely free.