For more than four decades, Fenwick & West LLP has helped some of the world’s most recognized companies become, and remain, market leaders. From emerging enterprises to large public corporations, our clients are leaders in the technology, life sciences and cleantech sectors and are fundamentally changing the world through rapid innovation.  MORE >

Fenwick & West was founded in 1972 in the heart of Silicon Valley—before “Silicon Valley” existed—by four visionary lawyers who left a top-tier New York law firm to pursue their shared belief that technology would revolutionize the business world and to pioneer the legal work for those technological innovations. In order to be most effective, they decided they needed to move to a location close to primary research and technology development. These four attorneys opened their first office in downtown Palo Alto, and Fenwick became one of the first technology law firms in the world.  MORE >

From our founding in 1972, Fenwick has been committed to promoting diversity and inclusion both within our firm and throughout the legal profession. For almost four decades, the firm has actively promoted an open and inclusive work environment and committed significant resources towards improving our diversity efforts at every level.  MORE >

FLEX by Fenwick is the only service created by an AmLaw 100 firm that provides flexible and cost-effective solutions for interim in-house legal needs to high-growth companies.  MORE >

Fenwick & West handles significant cross-border legal and business issues for a wide range of technology and life sciences who operate internationally..  MORE >

At Fenwick, we are proud of our commitment to the community and to our culture of making a difference in the lives of individuals and organizations in the communities where we live and work. We recognize that providing legal services is not only an essential part of our professional responsibility, but also an excellent opportunity for our attorneys to gain valuable practical experience, learn new areas of the law and contribute to the community.  MORE >

Year after year, Fenwick & West is honored for excellence in the legal profession. Many of our attorneys are recognized as leaders in their respective fields, and our Corporate, Tax, Litigation and Intellectual Property Practice Groups consistently receive top national and international rankings, including:

  • Named Technology Group of the Year by Law360
  • Ranked #1 in the Americas for number of technology deals in 2015 by Mergermarket
  • Nearly 20 percent of Fenwick partners are ranked by Chambers
  • Consistently ranked among the top 10 law firms in the U.S. for diversity
  • Recognized as having top mentoring and pro bono programs by Euromoney


We take sustainability very seriously at Fenwick. Like many of our clients, we are adopting policies that reduce consumption and waste, and improve efficiency. By using technologies developed by a number of our cleantech clients, we are at the forefront of implementing sustainable policies and practices that minimize environmental impact. In fact, Fenwick has earned recognition in several areas as one of the top US law firms for implementing sustainable business practices.  MORE >

At Fenwick, we have a passion for excellence and innovation that mirrors our client base. Our firm is making revolutionary changes to the practice of law through substantial investments in proprietary technology tools and processes—allowing us to deliver best-in-class legal services more effectively.   MORE >

Mountain View Office
Silicon Valley Center
801 California Street
Mountain View, CA 94041

San Francisco Office
555 California Street
12th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104

Seattle Office
1191 Second Avenue
10th Floor
Seattle, WA 98101

New York Office
1211 Avenue of the Americas
32nd Floor
New York, NY 10036

Shanghai Office
Unit 908, 9/F, Kerry Parkside Office
No. 1155 Fang Dian Road
Pudong New Area, Shanghai 201204
P.R. China
+86 21 8017 1200

U.S. Appeals Court Rules for eBay in Tiffany Spat

April 01, 2010

April 1, 2010 (Mountain View, CA) - Sally Abel, partner and Chair of the Trademark Group at Fenwick & West LLP, was recently quoted in the Reuters article "U.S. appeals court rules for eBay in Tiffany spat."

In a U.S. appeals court ruling, it was deemed that eBay Inc. did not engage in trademark infringement and dilution by selling counterfeit Tiffany & Co goods on its website. Tiffany accused eBay of false advertising because its website touted Tiffany goods, but many of them were actually counterfeit. The appeals court disagreed with the finding of the district court that eBay's ads were not likely to confuse consumers.

The court signaled that eBay met its responsibilities in its partnership with brand holders, said Sally Abel, who was not a party in the case.

"It's a win for e-commerce," said Abel, adding that the ruling helps define "the need for the online marketplace to have rules and to protect trademark rights up to a point—but only up to that point."

The case over Tiffany's claims began in 2004 and was seen as a major challenge in the United States to the freedom of Web companies from eBay to Google Inc. After a week long bench trial in late 2007 before the U.S. District Court, Judge Richard Sullivan ruled in July 2008 that eBay was not liable for trademark infringement by allowing fake Tiffany goods to be sold on the website by individuals. Tiffany appealed to the higher court.

In 2009, oral arguments were heard by a panel of judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in New York, which ruled that eBay and others have "a strong incentive to minimize the counterfeit goods sold on their websites." Tiffany argued that if eBay were not held liable except when infringing items are brought to its attention, it will have no incentive to stop the sale of counterfeits.

Tiffany has stated it would consider an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. eBay criticized the use of courts to settle these issues, saying "we continue to support cooperation, rather than litigation."

The case is Tiffany & Co v eBay Inc, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in New York, No. 08-3947.

The article can be read in its entirety on the Reuters website.