The Criminal Framework for Trademark Counterfeiting
The unlawful use of another's trademark or service mark, appellation of origin or geographical indication is punished in Georgia by Article 196 of the Criminal Code, and the norm covers the whole cycle of marking goods — from the making of the mark to the production of marked goods and their introduction into circulation. Boundaries should be noted as well: the registration and cancellation of marks follow the regime of the national intellectual-property centre, and the automatic statutory-damages regime known from the United States system does not exist in Georgian criminal law — criminal liability here is built on quantitative thresholds.
The Compositions and the Sanctions
The first part establishes the basic composition: the unlawful making in a large quantity of another's mark, appellation or indication, or any other unlawful use of them, as well as the production or introduction into civil circulation of goods unlawfully marked with such signs or with a registered firm name, having caused significant damage — punished by a fine or corrective labour for up to two years, or imprisonment for the same term. The second part regulates a separate composition: the false indication of a warning marking together with an unregistered mark — punished by a fine or community service from one hundred twenty to one hundred eighty hours, or corrective labour for up to one year, or imprisonment for two to three years. The third part aggravates liability where the act was committed more than once, by a person convicted of such a crime, or by a group by prior conspiracy — a fine or imprisonment for three to five years.
Quantitative Thresholds and Defence Tactics
The note to the norm defines two simplifying thresholds: the making is "in a large quantity" where the total number of marks exceeds one thousand units; and the crime is treated as causing significant damage where the value of the produced or circulated marked goods exceeds five thousand lari. These two figures are the pivots of the case: for the defence — if the quantity does not cross the threshold or the damage is not established, the composition does not stand; for the prosecution — they are the starting point for showing that both thresholds are exceeded. In practice the argument usually concentrates on three points: the similarity of the mark and its capacity to mislead the consumer; the method of calculating the value of the goods; and the fact of introduction into circulation. Each depends on documents — inspection protocols, expert examination and accounting traces are the inventory of the case. Note that the two thresholds attach to different objects: the one-thousand-unit threshold concerns only the marks made, while the five-thousand-lari threshold concerns the value of the marked goods — the prosecution must therefore establish each direction separately.