Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 831.03 (2025)
Forging or counterfeiting private labels; definitions.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
831.03 Forging or counterfeiting private labels; definitions.—As used in ss. 831.03-831.034, the term:
(1) “Bodily injury” means:
(a) A cut, abrasion, bruise, burn, or disfigurement;
(b) Physical pain;
(c) Illness;
(d) Impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty; or
(e) Any other injury to the body, no matter how temporary.
(2) “Culpable negligence” means reckless disregard of human life or safety and consciously doing an act or following a course of conduct that the actor knew, or reasonably should have known, was likely to cause bodily injury.
(3) “Forged or counterfeit trademark or service mark” refers to a mark:
(a) That is applied to or used in connection with any goods, services, labels, patches, stickers, wrappers, badges, emblems, medallions, charms, boxes, containers, cans, cases, hangtags, documentation, or packaging or any other components of any type or nature that are designed, marketed, or otherwise intended to be used on or in connection with any goods or services;
(b) That is identical with or an imitation of a mark registered for those goods or services on the principal register in the United States Patent and Trademark Office or the trademark register for the State of Florida or any other state, or protected by the Amateur Sports Act of 1978, 36 U.S.C. s. 380, whether or not the offender knew such mark was so registered or protected;
(c) The use of which is unauthorized by the owner of the registered mark; and
(d) The application or use of which is either likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive or is otherwise intended to be used on or in connection with the goods or services for which the mark is registered.
An otherwise legitimate mark is deemed counterfeit for purposes of this definition if, by altering the nature of any item to which it is affixed, the altered item bearing the otherwise legitimate mark is likely, in the course of commerce, to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive.
(4) “Retail value” means:
(a) The counterfeiter’s regular selling price for the goods or services, unless the goods or services bearing a counterfeit mark would appear to a reasonably prudent person to be authentic, then the retail value shall be the price of the authentic counterpart; or, if no authentic reasonably similar counterpart exists, then the retail value shall remain the counterfeiter’s regular selling price.
(b) In the case of labels, patches, stickers, wrappers, badges, emblems, medallions, charms, boxes, containers, cans, cases, hangtags, documentation, or packaging or any other components of any type or nature that are designed, marketed, or otherwise intended to be used on or in connection with any goods or services, the retail value shall be treated as if each component was a finished good and valued as described in paragraph (a).
(5) “Serious bodily injury” means bodily injury that involves:
(a) A substantial risk of death;
(b) Extreme physical pain;
(c) Protracted and obvious disfigurement; or
(d) Protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty.
History.—s. 1, ch. 3621, 1885; RS 2481; GS 3361; RGS 5209; CGL 7327; s. 961, ch. 71-136; s. 1, ch. 95-300; s. 1, ch. 2008-255.
Arrestable Offenses under F.S. 831.03
M = misdemeanor · F = felony · degree: F=1st S=2nd T=3rd§831.03(1a)FORGERY OFPRIVATE LABELS 1000 DOLS OR MORE
§831.03(1a)COUNTERFEITING OFPRIVATE LABELS 1000 DOLS OR MORE
§831.03(1b)COUNTERFEITING OFPRIVATE LABELS UNDER 1000 DOLS
§831.03(1b)FORGERY OFPRIVATE LABELS UNDER 1000 DOLS
§831.03(1c)COUNTERFEITING OFPRIVATE LABELS REPEATED OFF
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case, 1990–1990 · leading case: Ritter v. State, 569 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
Ritter v. State, 569 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). “Although the state failed to prove a violation of section 831.03, Florida Statutes (1989), appellant has not challenged the other charges which support his convictions for violating and conspiring to violate the RICO Act.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.