How to Gather visual comparisons, sales history, and consumer recognition evidence in a trade dress case

Trade dress cases often turn on proof. A brand may feel copied, a package may look strikingly familiar, and customers may even start asking whether two products are connected. But in litigation, enforcement letters, or registration strategy, the real question is usually not just whether the look feels similar. The question is whether the evidence shows that the claimed look actually functions as a source identifier, is nonfunctional, and is likely to cause consumer confusion.

That is why evidence collection tends to shape the entire dispute.

If you are new to this area, it may help to start with a broader overview of how trade dress protection works in practice, including distinctiveness, packaging, product design, and consumer confusion. In this post, you’ll learn how to gather three of the most important categories of proof in a trade dress case: visual comparisons, sales history, and consumer recognition evidence.

<aside> 💡 Scroll to the bottom for every post in this series.

</aside>

Why Evidence Matters So Much In Trade Dress Cases

Trade dress claims arise under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, which addresses false designation of origin and related unfair competition claims under federal law. The statute is broad, but trade dress claims are shaped heavily by case law and USPTO guidance on distinctiveness, functionality, and confusion under 15 U.S.C. § 1125 and the USPTO’s discussion of trade dress examination standards.

The Supreme Court has drawn several important lines:

In Two Pesos v. Taco Cabana, the Court held that inherently distinctive trade dress may be protectable without proof of secondary meaning.
In Wal-Mart v. Samara Brothers, the Court explained that product design trade dress generally requires proof of secondary meaning, because consumers are less likely to treat design itself as source-identifying.
In TrafFix Devices v. Marketing Displays, the Court reinforced that functional features are not protectable as trade dress, even if they are visually recognizable.

Those rules help explain why evidence gathering tends to focus on three recurring themes:

What exactly is being claimed visually
Whether the market has come to associate that look with one source
Whether consumers are likely to be confused by the accused look

What Counts As Visual Comparison Evidence

Visual comparison evidence is the record showing what your trade dress looks like, what the accused look resembles, and why the similarities matter when viewed as a whole.

Courts assessing confusion often look at overall appearance, commercial impression, proximity of the goods, actual confusion, and related factors. Cornell’s Wex summary of likelihood of confusion captures the common framework courts use, even though exact factor tests vary by circuit.

In practical terms, visual comparison evidence often includes:

Product packaging side-by-side images