Allegis Group, Inc. v. Youtube, LLC et al

On November 11, 2021, Allegis Group, Inc. (“Allegis Group” or “Plaintiff”), represented by Sherry H. Flax of Saul Ewing LLP, filed an intellectual property lawsuit against YouTube, LLC (“YouTube”) and John Does Nos. 1-7 (“YouTubers” or “Scammers” or “Defendant”), seeking monetary damages, interests, costs, and other reliefs for alleged irreparable harm to Plaintiff’s public image, brand, and reputation. This case was filed in the United States District Court in the District of Maryland with Judge Richard D. Bennett presiding.

This complaint arises from a direct consequence of YouTube’s decision to promote and legitimize an alleged pervasive and injurious fraud occurring on its platform, as perpetrated by the Scammers. YouTube’s refusal to take remedial action compels Allegis Group to seek relief from the Court.

In the complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that “YouTube and the Scammers, without Allegis Group’s consent, have used the Allegis Marks, in promoting the Scam to users who YouTube knew would engage with the content. Specifically, YouTube’s algorithm uses keywords – in this case, Allegis Group’s protected marks such as “Allegis” and “Allegis Group” – to target Scam videos to unsuspecting YouTube users. YouTube and the Scammers’ use of the Allegis Marks were intended to deceive. Moreover, YouTube and the Scammers’ use of the Allegis Marks is likely to cause, and in fact caused, significant confusion, as evidenced by the large number of victims claimed by the Scam.”

The Plaintiff also alleged that “The Scammers have created fake accounts to infringe Allegis Group’s valid and protected trademarks. These fake accounts and their channels prominently display the Allegis Marks, creating a false and misleading impression to YouTube users that they are official Allegis Group accounts. These fake accounts display and use and therefore directly infringe upon the Allegis Marks.”

Further, the Plaintiff alleged that “Defendants’ use of the Allegis Marks in connection with the offering of goods and/or services through the YouTube platform is likely to cause confusion. In particular, Defendants’ use of the Allegis Marks on the YouTube platform in connection with the offering of goods and/or services is likely to cause confusion and mistake and to deceive consumers as to the source, origin, or sponsorship of such goods and services. Consumers seeing goods and/or services offered under the Allegis Marks will believe that such goods and/or services are sponsored by, associated with, or otherwise affiliated with Allegis Group.”

There are four claims for relief laid down by the Plaintiff. The first claim for relief is for alleged trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114 (section 32 of the Lanham act). The second claim for relief is for alleged contributory and vicarious trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114 (section 32 of the Lanham act). The third claim for relief is for alleged unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (section 43 of the Lanham act). The fourth claim for relief is for alleged unfair competition under Maryland common law.

In the prayer for relief, the Plaintiff has requested the Court to pass a judgment against the Defendants for monetary damages, interest, costs, reasonable attorneys’ fees, and such further relief as the Court deems proper.

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.