Selling Counterfeit Goods in Georgia (O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454): Laws, Penalties, Defenses & FAQs

Counterfeit Goods Are Not a “Business Dispute” in Georgia

Selling fake or counterfeit goods in Georgia is not treated as a minor regulatory violation or a slap-on-the-wrist consumer issue. Under O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454, the sale, offer for sale, or possession with intent to sell counterfeit merchandise is a criminal offense that can expose individuals and businesses to arrest, seizure of inventory, fines, jail time, and lasting reputational damage.

These cases are frequently misunderstood. Many defendants are shocked to learn that intent can be inferred, that knowledge can be proven circumstantially, and that small-scale or online sales can still trigger criminal liability. Georgia prosecutors pursue these cases aggressively, especially where brand protection, organized retail theft, or consumer deception is alleged.

At The Sherman Law Group, we approach counterfeit-goods cases with discipline, statutory precision, and evidentiary rigor. These cases are won by dismantling assumptions—about knowledge, intent, authenticity, and supply chains—not by hoping the problem disappears.

What Does O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454 Prohibit?

Georgia law makes it illegal to knowingly sell, offer for sale, distribute, or possess with intent to sell counterfeit goods—goods that bear a counterfeit trademark or brand identifier likely to cause confusion or deception as to authenticity or source.

Key concepts:

• Knowledge matters (actual or inferred)
• Intent to sell matters
• Likelihood of consumer confusion matters
• Seizure and forfeiture are authorized

The statute targets both street-level sales and online commerce, including flea markets, pop-ups, social media, and e-commerce platforms.

What Counts as “Counterfeit Goods” Under Georgia Law?

Counterfeit goods typically include items that:

• Bear a fake or unauthorized trademark, logo, or brand
• Are designed to imitate genuine branded products
• Are likely to cause consumers to believe they are authentic

Common examples:

• Designer handbags, shoes, and apparel
• Watches, jewelry, and accessories
• Electronics and accessories
• Cosmetics, fragrances, and health products

Counterfeiting cases often hinge on expert testimony, brand-owner complaints, and product comparison analysis.

Criminal Penalties for Selling Counterfeit Goods in Georgia

Depending on the facts, penalties may include:

• Misdemeanor or felony charges (based on value, quantity, and conduct)
• Jail or prison time
• Fines and restitution
• Seizure and destruction of goods
• Forfeiture of proceeds
• Probation and business restrictions

Repeat conduct, large inventories, or organized activity can significantly increase exposure.

75 Frequently Asked Questions About Selling Counterfeit Goods in Georgia

1. Is selling counterfeit goods a crime in Georgia?

Yes. It is a criminal offense under O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454.

2. Do I have to know the goods were fake to be charged?

Knowledge is required, but it can be inferred from circumstances, pricing, sourcing, and conduct.

3. Is selling one fake item enough for charges?

Potentially yes, especially if intent to sell is shown.

4. Does this apply to online sales?

Yes. Online platforms are a major enforcement focus.

5. Are flea market vendors targeted?

Frequently. Georgia actively enforces counterfeit laws in physical markets.

6. Can police seize my inventory?

Yes. Seizure and forfeiture are authorized.

7. What if I bought the items from a wholesaler?

Supplier claims do not automatically defeat knowledge or intent.

8. Is this a civil or criminal matter?

It can be both. Criminal charges are common.

9. Can trademark owners trigger prosecutions?

Yes. Brand-owner complaints often initiate cases.

10. Does packaging matter?

Yes. Packaging and labeling are key evidence.

11. What if the logo is slightly different?

Similarity and likelihood of confusion are analyzed.

12. Are “replicas” illegal?

Often yes, if they cause confusion.

13. Can I be charged without a consumer complaint?

Yes.

14. Is intent to deceive required?

The statute focuses on knowing sale of counterfeit goods.

15. Are first-time offenders treated leniently?

Not automatically.

16. Can I be arrested on the spot?

Yes.

17. What if I didn’t make much money?

Profit is relevant but not dispositive.

18. Are employees liable?

Potentially, depending on role and knowledge.

19. Can businesses be charged?

Yes.

20. Are counterfeit cosmetics treated differently?

Often more seriously due to safety concerns.

21. Can police test products on site?

Preliminary assessments are common.

22. What if the goods were gifts or samples?

Intent to sell is key.

23. Does the value of goods matter?

Yes, for charging and sentencing.

24. Can charges be dismissed?

Yes, with strong defenses.

25. Is expert testimony required?

Often yes, to establish counterfeit status.

26. Can I claim ignorance?

Ignorance alone is rarely sufficient.

27. What if branding was removed?

Other evidence may still support charges.

28. Are knockoffs always illegal?

Context and confusion analysis matter.

29. Does trademark registration matter?

Yes.

30. Can law enforcement use undercover buys?

Yes.

31. Are social media ads evidence?

Yes.

32. Can prosecutors stack charges?

Yes.

33. Is forfeiture automatic?

Not always—contestable.

34. Can this affect my business license?

Yes.

35. Are juveniles charged differently?

Yes, but consequences still exist.

36. What if I stopped selling immediately?

Helpful but not dispositive.

37. Are counterfeit cases negotiable?

Often.

38. Can intent be proven circumstantially?

Yes.

39. Do price disparities matter?

Significantly.

40. Are invoices and records important?

Yes.

41. Can multiple brands be charged separately?

Yes.

42. Is consumer confusion presumed?

Often argued, but contestable.

43. Can goods be destroyed?

Yes.

44. Does quantity matter?

Yes.

45. Are shipping records evidence?

Yes.

46. Can I talk to investigators?

Not without counsel.

47. Is this considered fraud?

It is closely related.

48. Are counterfeit electronics treated harshly?

Yes.

49. Can cases involve organized retail theft units?

Yes.

50. Can I face federal charges too?

Possibly, but many cases stay state-level.

51. Are disclaimers effective?

Usually not.

52. What if customers knew they were fake?

Still potentially illegal.

53. Can lab testing be challenged?

Yes.

54. Are photos enough to prove counterfeit status?

Often disputed.

55. Can I claim resale ignorance?

Fact-specific.

56. Is intent to sell required for possession charges?

Yes.

57. Are seized funds automatically forfeited?

Not always.

58. Can brand representatives testify?

Yes.

59. Is probation common?

Depends on case severity.

60. Can charges be reduced to civil penalties?

Sometimes.

61. Are counterfeit cases jury-friendly?

They can be emotionally charged.

62. Does advertising language matter?

Yes.

63. Can packaging alone trigger liability?

Potentially.

64. Are marketplace operators liable?

Sometimes.

65. Can this affect immigration status?

Yes.

66. Is intent to deceive consumers required?

Knowledge and likelihood of confusion are central.

67. Can supply-chain evidence help?

Yes.

68. Are counterfeit cases fast-moving?

Often yes.

69. Can I recover seized goods?

Sometimes.

70. Does cooperation help?

Only strategically.

71. Can this impact future employment?

Yes.

72. Are repeat offenses treated harshly?

Yes.

73. Can I expunge a conviction?

Generally no.

74. Should I hire a criminal defense lawyer?

Absolutely.

75. When should I act?

Immediately.

Counterfeit Allegations Demand Serious Criminal Defense

Selling counterfeit goods in Georgia is not a technical violation—it is a criminal accusation that can cost you your freedom, your livelihood, and your reputation. These cases turn on knowledge, intent, authenticity, and evidence quality, not assumptions or panic.

At The Sherman Law Group, we defend counterfeit-goods cases with discipline, precision, and controlled aggression. We challenge the State’s proof, attack weak inferences, and protect our clients from overreach.

If you are under investigation or charged under O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454, who you hire matters.

The Sherman Law Group stands ready to defend you.

50 Defenses to Selling Counterfeit Goods in Georgia

(O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454)

1. Lack of Knowledge

The statute requires knowing conduct. If the seller did not know the goods were counterfeit, the offense is not complete. Knowledge cannot be presumed merely because the item was fake.

2. No Intent to Sell

Possession alone is not enough. The State must prove intent to sell or distribute, not merely storage, transport, or personal ownership.

3. Legitimate Supply Chain Defense

Invoices, wholesalers, distributors, or liquidation sources may show the defendant reasonably believed the goods were authentic.

4. Absence of Consumer Confusion

If the goods were clearly presented as non-authentic, novelty, or generic, the likelihood of confusion element may fail.

5. Trademark Not Properly Registered

If the allegedly infringed trademark is not properly registered or enforceable, the State’s case weakens substantially.

6. Counterfeit Status Not Proven

The State must prove the goods are counterfeit—not merely similar, inspired, or lower quality. Similarity is not enough.

7. Inadequate Expert Testimony

Many prosecutions rely on brand representatives who lack proper forensic or evidentiary qualifications.

8. Improper Seizure of Goods

If inventory was seized without lawful authority, warrant, or probable cause, evidence may be suppressed.

9. Overbroad Search Warrants

Warrants authorizing seizure of “all merchandise” often violate constitutional limits and can gut the case.

10. No Proof Defendant Controlled Sales

If others handled pricing, advertising, or transactions, control—and intent—may not be established.

11. Employee or Agent Misconduct

An employee selling counterfeit goods without the owner’s knowledge does not automatically transfer criminal liability.

12. No Proof of Actual Sale

Offering for sale must be proven. Mere display or possession is not always sufficient.

13. Price Alone Is Not Proof

Low pricing may raise suspicion but does not prove counterfeit knowledge or intent.

14. Ambiguous Branding

Logos or marks that differ materially from registered trademarks undermine the State’s case.

15. Disclaimers and Context

While disclaimers are not dispositive, they are relevant to intent and consumer confusion.

16. Civil Dispute Mischaracterized as Criminal

Some cases belong in civil trademark court, not criminal court. Prosecutorial overreach can be challenged.

17. Entrapment or Improper Sting Operations

If law enforcement induced the sale and the defendant lacked predisposition, entrapment may apply.

18. Chain of Custody Failures

If seized goods cannot be reliably traced from seizure to courtroom, authenticity evidence may collapse.

19. Selective or Targeted Enforcement

Targeting specific vendors or demographics without neutral criteria raises constitutional concerns.

20. Improper Venue

The alleged sale must occur in the prosecuting county. Venue errors are fatal.

21. Lack of Mens Rea Evidence

Circumstantial evidence must actually support knowing conduct—not speculation.

22. Supplier Fraud Defense

If the defendant was himself defrauded by suppliers, criminal intent is absent.

23. One-Time or Isolated Incident

Isolated conduct weakens claims of knowing, ongoing counterfeit sales.

24. No Advertising or Marketing Evidence

Absence of ads, listings, or promotions undermines intent to sell.

25. Goods Never Reached Consumers

If no goods were sold or offered publicly, criminal exposure may be limited.

26. Improper Charge Stacking

Each item or brand cannot always be charged separately without violating proportionality.

27. No Evidence Defendant Set Prices

Pricing decisions often indicate knowledge. Absence of such control weakens the case.

28. Inconsistent Brand Testimony

Different brand witnesses often disagree on what constitutes a counterfeit.

29. Failure to Prove Willfulness

Mistake, negligence, or poor sourcing is not criminal intent.

30. Constitutional Vagueness

Overly vague application of “counterfeit” can violate due process.

31. Goods Are Gray-Market, Not Counterfeit

Gray-market goods are genuine products sold outside authorized channels—and are legal.

32. Lack of Proof of Ownership of Goods

If ownership is unclear, criminal liability may not attach.

33. Improper Forfeiture Procedures

Seizure does not equal forfeiture. Procedural errors matter.

34. Inconsistent Valuation

Inflated valuation exaggerates criminal exposure and can be challenged.

35. No Proof of Repetition

Pattern evidence is often assumed but not proven.

36. Misleading Police Reports

Officers often lack training in trademark law.

37. Improper Jury Instructions

Incorrect instructions on knowledge or intent justify acquittal.

38. Failure to Distinguish Replica vs. Counterfeit

Not all replicas violate criminal law.

39. Lack of Independent Authentication

Reliance on brand claims without testing is insufficient.

40. Good-Faith Business Practices

Evidence of compliance efforts supports lack of criminal intent.

41. Unreliable Undercover Purchases

Controlled buys are often poorly documented.

42. Improper Expert Methodology

Failure to follow recognized authentication standards undermines expert testimony.

43. Suppression of Statements

Statements obtained without proper Miranda warnings must be excluded.

44. No Proof Defendant Knew Trademark Significance

Knowledge of branding law is not presumed.

45. Overcriminalization Defense

Legislative intent was not to criminalize every marketplace mistake.

46. Evidence of Return or Refund Policy

Refunds undermine fraudulent intent.

47. No Financial Gain

Lack of profit undermines motive.

48. Prosecutorial Misinterpretation of Business Records

Accounting errors are not crimes.

49. Reasonable Doubt Across Multiple Elements

Even small gaps defeat criminal liability.

50. Failure of the State to Meet Its Burden

If any statutory element fails, acquittal is required.

III. Prosecution vs. Defense Strategy Chart

(O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454)

Final Word from The Sherman Law Group

Selling counterfeit goods cases are not slam dunks. They are evidence-heavy, intent-driven, and assumption-laden prosecutions. When defended correctly, they often unravel.

At The Sherman Law Group, we do not defend based on excuses—we defend based on law, proof, and precision.

When Commerce Becomes Criminal

Selling counterfeit or imitation goods in Georgia is not a minor regulatory issue—it is a serious criminal offense that can expose individuals and businesses to jail time, massive fines, forfeiture of property, and permanent reputational damage. Prosecutors often portray these cases as clear-cut: fake goods, dishonest seller, easy conviction. In reality, counterfeit-goods prosecutions are legally complex, evidence-heavy, and frequently overcharged.

At The Sherman Law Group, we defend these cases with precision, skepticism, and force. We understand how Georgia prosecutors build counterfeit-goods cases—and more importantly, where those cases break.

Georgia’s Counterfeit Goods Law Explained (O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454)

Under O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454, it is illegal to knowingly sell, offer for sale, or possess with intent to sell counterfeit or imitation goods bearing a trademark or brand substantially indistinguishable from a genuine mark.

Key elements include:

1. A counterfeit or imitation mark
2. Knowledge that the goods were counterfeit
3. Intent to sell or distribute
4. Likelihood of consumer confusion

Fail one element, and the case collapses.

Information on Counterfeit and Fake Goods

1. Flea Markets Are Ground Zero for Arrests

Georgia counterfeit cases often begin at flea markets, pop-up booths, or roadside sales—places where assumptions replace investigation.

2. “Everyone Sells This Stuff” Is Not a Defense

But it does expose selective enforcement, which matters to juries and judges.

3. Police Often Don’t Know the Product

Officers rely on “brand reps” or gut feelings—not forensic trademark analysis.

4. One Bad Supplier Can Ruin Everything

Many defendants are resellers, not manufacturers, with no control over upstream fraud.

5. Cash Sales Get Treated Like Criminal Intent

Cash ≠ guilt. Prosecutors love optics; defense wins with facts.

6. Quantity Is Overplayed

Ten items can be charged like ten thousand if the defense doesn’t stop it.

7. Language Barriers Matter

Many accused sellers never understood what they were buying or selling.

8. Seizures Hurt Before Convictions

Goods, cash, and vehicles are often seized before guilt is proven.

9. Police Confuse Trademark Law With Crime

Not every trademark issue is criminal—many are civil disputes.

10. Jail Is Not Rare

Prosecutors threaten jail to force pleas; strong defense deflates that leverage.

More Information on Counterfeit and Fake Goods

1. Online Sales Multiply Exposure

Amazon, eBay, and Shopify sales trigger multi-jurisdictional scrutiny.

2. Business Owners Are Personally Charged

LLCs do not automatically shield criminal liability.

3. Search Warrants Are Often Overbroad

Inventory seizures routinely exceed legal authority.

4. “Counterfeit” Is a Technical Term

Similarity alone does not equal illegality.

5. Brand Investigators Are Not Neutral

They work for profit-motivated companies—not justice.

6. Recordkeeping Saves Cases

Invoices, emails, and contracts often defeat “knowledge” claims.

7. Licensing Agreements Get Misunderstood

Parallel imports and gray-market goods are often lawful.

8. Civil Disputes Become Criminal

Prosecutors improperly criminalize business disagreements.

9. Reputation Is the Real Casualty

A charge alone can destroy a business—even if dismissed later.

10. Early Counsel Changes Outcomes

Pre-indictment intervention can stop charges entirely.

PROSECUTION VS. DEFENSE CHART

50 COMMON (AND COSTLY) MISTAKES DEFENDANTS MAKE

1. Talking to police without counsel
2. Admitting supplier issues
3. Assuming civil trademark law applies
4. Ignoring forfeiture proceedings
5. Destroying invoices
6. Pleading guilty too early
7. Underestimating “knowledge” element
8. Accepting officer opinions as fact
9. Failing to challenge expert witnesses
10. Believing similarity equals guilt
11. Overlooking chain of custody
12. Assuming seized goods were tested
13. Ignoring search-warrant defects
14. Misunderstanding intent standards
15. Confusing trademark and copyright law
16. Letting prosecutors inflate quantities
17. Ignoring selective enforcement
18. Treating brand reps as neutral
19. Assuming online platforms equal proof
20. Not demanding laboratory analysis
21. Accepting police inventory lists
22. Overlooking civil-settlement leverage
23. Ignoring constitutional defenses
24. Underestimating jury skepticism
25. Letting emotion override strategy
26. Failing to preserve evidence
27. Allowing overcharging to stand
28. Ignoring mitigation opportunities
29. Talking to suppliers post-arrest
30. Posting on social media
31. Missing pretrial motion deadlines
32. Accepting plea offers blindly
33. Ignoring venue challenges
34. Overlooking mens rea defenses
35. Failing to challenge consumer confusion
36. Assuming first offense equals slap on wrist
37. Letting forfeiture proceed uncontested
38. Not preparing for jury bias
39. Accepting “common sense” arguments
40. Failing to separate civil from criminal
41. Ignoring parallel investigations
42. Underestimating probation risks
43. Overlooking immigration consequences
44. Ignoring business-license fallout
45. Not hiring trial-ready counsel
46. Letting prosecutors define narrative
47. Failing to humanize defendant
48. Treating case as paperwork issue
49. Waiting too long to fight back
50. Assuming dismissal is automatic

50 FULLY DEVELOPED DEFENSES (SUMMARY LIST)

1. Lack of knowledge
2. Lawful sourcing
3. No intent to sell
4. Civil trademark dispute
5. Not substantially indistinguishable
6. No consumer confusion
7. Parallel import defense
8. Overbroad warrant
9. Illegal seizure
10. Chain of custody failures
11. Officer lacked expertise
12. Biased brand representative
13. Selective enforcement
14. Entrapment
15. Mistake of fact
16. Authorization or license
17. Inadequate testing
18. Misidentification of goods
19. Improper expert testimony
20. Hearsay reliance
21. Lack of jurisdiction
22. Improper venue
23. Statutory vagueness
24. Constitutional violations
25. Co-mingled inventory
26. Third-party responsibility
27. Business-entity separation
28. No offer for sale
29. Possession without intent
30. Price variance defense
31. Supplier fraud
32. Language barriers
33. Innocent reseller defense
34. No profit motive
35. Evidence contamination
36. Improper inventory valuation
37. Probable cause defects
38. Suppression of statements
39. Unlawful detention
40. Prosecutorial overreach
41. Jury nullification themes
42. Lack of mens rea
43. Civil settlement resolution
44. Pre-trial diversion eligibility
45. Statute of limitations
46. Insufficient notice
47. Double jeopardy issues
48. Unreliable witness testimony
49. Discovery violations
50. Reasonable doubt across elements

Jury-Impact Paragraphs (Why These Cases Feel Bigger Than They Are)

Jurors are naturally suspicious of “fake goods,” but they are equally suspicious of overreach. When prosecutors try to turn commerce into criminality, jurors listen closely to defenses rooted in fairness, intent, and proof. The Sherman Law Group frames these cases not as excuses—but as failures of the State to meet its burden.

Counterfeit Allegations Demand Real Defense

Selling counterfeit goods cases are not slam dunks. They are element-by-element battles involving intent, knowledge, consumer confusion, and constitutional limits. Prosecutors rely on optics. We rely on law.

At The Sherman Law Group, we are known for aggressive, intelligent, and trial-ready defense. If you are accused under O.C.G.A. § 10-1-454, you need lawyers who understand both the business world and the courtroom.

That’s what we do. And we do it exceptionally well.