Estée Lauder Sues Walmart Over Alleged Sale of Counterfeit Beauty Products
Estée Lauder has sued Walmart in federal court in California, alleging the retailer allowed counterfeit beauty and fragrance products bearing Estée Lauder trademarks to be sold through its online marketplace. The complaint alleges shoppers were misled about the authenticity and source of products listed on Walmart.com.
According to the lawsuit, Estée Lauder alleges that products marketed under brand names including Le Labo, Tom Ford, Clinique, La Mer, Aveda, and Estée Lauder itself were sold on Walmart’s website, despite not being authentic products. The company claims the items used identical or nearly identical branding, creating a likelihood that consumers would believe they were purchasing authorized goods.
The cosmetics company states that it purchased, inspected, or tested certain items offered on Walmart.com and determined they were counterfeit. Those products allegedly included skincare, fragrances, and personal care items bearing Estée Lauder-owned trademarks. The complaint claims the presence of those goods on a major retail platform harmed the brands and exposed consumers to products they did not intend to buy.
While many of the listings were operated by third-party sellers, the lawsuit argues that Walmart’s involvement extended beyond hosting an online marketplace. Estée Lauder alleges that Walmart promoted the products, allowed the use of its trademarks in product listings and search tools, and presented the platform in a way that could reasonably lead shoppers to believe Walmart itself was the seller. The filing claims that this presentation increased confusion about who was responsible for the products being sold.
Estée Lauder further alleges that Walmart failed to take adequate steps to ensure that only authorized and authentic goods were offered for sale. The complaint claims the company knew or had reason to know that counterfeit products were being sold on its platform and nevertheless allowed those sales to continue. The lawsuit also alleges Walmart financially benefited from the transactions while failing to prevent trademark violations.
The legal claims are grounded in federal trademark law, which is intended to protect consumers from being misled about the source of products and to prevent companies from trading on another brand’s reputation without authorization. Trademark infringement occurs when a protected brand name or logo is used in commerce in a way that is likely to cause confusion about who made or approved a product.
The lawsuit also raises claims of trademark counterfeiting, which is treated more severely under federal law than ordinary infringement. Counterfeiting involves goods that are alleged to be fake copies designed to appear identical to genuine products. Because counterfeit goods can pose heightened risks to consumers and cause broader harm to brand trust, federal law allows stronger remedies when counterfeiting is alleged.
Another claim asserted in the lawsuit is false designation of origin. This doctrine focuses on whether consumers were misled about the source, sponsorship, or approval of a product. Estée Lauder argues that the way the products were listed and promoted on Walmart.com could have led shoppers to believe the items were produced by or authorized by the company.
The case also raises broader questions about the legal responsibilities of online marketplaces. Courts have generally held that platforms are not automatically responsible for the actions of third-party sellers. Liability may arise, however, when a marketplace is alleged to play an active role in promoting, controlling, or profiting from infringing sales. Estée Lauder’s lawsuit argues Walmart crossed that line by facilitating the listings and presenting them in a manner that implied retailer involvement.
In its filing, Estée Lauder seeks monetary damages for the alleged trademark violations and a court order barring Walmart from selling the disputed products. The company also requests additional relief available under federal trademark law.
