In this practical guide, I explore how lawyers can use AI tools like Claude to draft cease and desist notices for trademark infringement. Through a step-by-step demonstration, you will see how to prompt AI with the right factual details, how the tool structures a legally sound notice, and where human judgment must step in to refine and finalise the draft.
Table of Contents
Introduction
As a lawyer dealing with Intellectual Property Rights, a situation you will see often is clients coming to you for an infringement of their IP.
Perhaps it is a competitor using a logo that looks eerily like your clients. Perhaps their carefully built brand name has suddenly appeared on someone else’s website or product label. This is where a cease and desist notice comes into play, a simple but powerful tool to safeguard trademark rights before things spiral into a full-blown legal dispute.
And this is when your role steps in. Drafting a well-structured, legally sound notice takes time, effort, and clarity. You cannot afford to miss critical details, nor can you send a vague or poorly worded letter that the other side may easily ignore or challenge. What if there were a way to get a ready first draft in minutes, without the struggle of starting from a blank page?
This is where you can make use of Artificial Intelligence.
Tools like ChatGPT, Claude, etc, can assist you in generating a professional, legally acceptable cease and desist notice by simply answering the right questions. It does not replace your judgment as a lawyer, but it can certainly give you a strong starting point, saving time and helping you focus on fine-tuning the strategy.
But how should you use AI here? You cannot rely fully on AI. But you can use it as your assistant. I will walk you through exactly how you can use AI to create a cease and desist notice for trademark infringement. You will see the prompts I gave, the responses Claude produced, and how the draft shaped up step by step. By the end, you will know how to harness AI for your own legal drafting, while staying alert to its limitations.
Let us begin.
Legal framework governing cease and desist notices for trademark infringement
But first, what is a cease and desist notice?
A cease and desist notice is a legal letter sent to someone asking them to immediately stop an activity that violates the sender’s rights, and not to repeat it in the future. It is commonly used in trademark cases to prevent unauthorised use of a brand name, logo, or symbol.
For example, suppose you own a clothing shoe brand called “Fabshoes”, and you discover that another shop is selling shoes under the name “Fabuloushoes” with a similar logo, causing confusion among customers. You can send a cease and desist notice to that shop, demanding they stop using a similar mark and remove all such products from sale, or face legal action for trademark infringement.
A cease and desist notice for trademark infringement is not merely a formality; it is grounded in statutory rights under Indian trademark law. Here is the legal basis that supports such a notice:
The Trademarks Act, 1999
The primary legislation governing trademark rights in India is the Trademarks Act, 1999. Under this Act:
- Section 28: Grants exclusive rights to the registered proprietor of a trademark to use the mark in relation to the goods or services for which it is registered. It also allows the proprietor to seek relief in case of infringement.
- Section 29: Defines infringement. A person is said to infringe a registered trademark if they use a mark that is identical or deceptively similar to the registered mark in the course of trade, without the authorisation of the proprietor, leading to confusion or association in the minds of the public.
- Section 134: Specifies that suits for infringement must be filed before the appropriate District Court or High Court within whose jurisdiction the plaintiff resides or carries on business.
- Section 135: Details the remedies available to the aggrieved party, such as injunctions, damages, accounts of profits, and delivery-up of infringing goods.
Criminal provisions under the Trademarks Act, 1999
Apart from civil remedies, the Trademarks Act also provides for criminal penalties in cases of trademark infringement, especially when there is wilful falsification or fraudulent use of a trademark.
- Section 103: This section deals with the penalty for applying false trademarks, trade descriptions, or indicating false origin. Any person who falsifies a trademark or falsely applies it to goods or services, intending to deceive or cause injury, may be punished with:
- Imprisonment for a term not less than six months (which may extend to three years); and
- A fine not less than ₹50,000 (which may extend to ₹2,00,000).
- Section 104: This section provides punishment for selling goods or providing services to which a false trademark or false trade description is applied. The punishment is the same as under section 103, imprisonment and fine within the prescribed limits.
These criminal provisions add serious weight to a cease and desist notice. When such sections are referenced in the notice (especially in cases of wilful or fraudulent use), they can serve as a strong deterrent to the infringer.
By reminding the infringer of potential criminal liability under sections 103 and 104, the notice does not merely threaten civil proceedings (like injunction or damages) but also warns of possible penal consequences, including arrest and prosecution.
However, such references must be used carefully and only when justified, usually in cases of clear, intentional misuse, not where infringement could have been accidental or arguable.
What goes into a cease and desist notice for trademark infringement?
Before you can ask an AI tool like ChatGPT or Claude to draft a cease and desist notice, you need to understand what exactly must go into such a document. After all, a good legal notice is not simply about sounding serious or threatening; it must contain precise details that establish your rights and clearly communicate your demands.
So, what information does AI need from you to generate a solid first draft? Here is a simple checklist you should have ready:
- Your full name or your client’s name (and business name, if applicable) – Who is the trademark owner sending this notice to? Is it an individual or a business entity?
- Details of the trademark that has been infringed – Is the mark registered or unregistered? What class or goods/services does it cover? Is there a distinctive logo or stylisation involved?
- Details of the infringing party – What is the name and (if known) address of the person or company using the infringing mark?
- How the infringement occurred – Is the infringer using a deceptively similar logo, word mark, or trade dress? Where was this observed online, in stores, on packaging, advertisements?
- Evidence or examples of confusion (if any) – Has any customer complained or been misled? Are there screenshots, photos, or reports of the infringing use?
- Any prior communication – Has there been any warning or discussion with the infringer before this notice?
- What action do you want the infringer to take? – Do you want them to stop all use, withdraw products, destroy infringing goods, or issue a public clarification?
When you provide these details to any AI legal tool, you give it the raw material it needs to build a clear, complete, and persuasive notice.
In the next section, I will show you exactly how I fed this information to Claude and how the tool transformed it into a proper cease and desist notice draft.
Using Claude to draft: a practical demonstration
Now that you know what information is required to create a cease and desist notice, let me show you how I used Claude to generate an actual draft. This will give you a clear, practical understanding of how to guide the tool and what to expect in return.
Step 1: The first prompt to Claude
I began by asking Claude to act like a lawyer and draft a cease and desist notice for trademark violation. But instead of dumping all the details at once, I simply gave this instruction:
PROMPT 1 –
Act as a lawyer and draft a cease and desist notice for trademark violation. I will give the facts in the next prompt.
Claude responded, asking me for the following essential details:
Please provide me with the specific facts of your situation, including:
- Your trademark details (name, registration number if applicable, goods/services)
- The infringing party’s information and specific violations
- Timeline of events
- Any evidence of confusion or damage
- Your desired outcome.
Here, the AI acts as a thoughtful human lawyer. The lawyer would ask before drafting such a notice. AI reminds you of what to specify, even if you forget something yourself.
Step 2: Supplying the facts
In the next prompt, I gave Claude all the facts it needed. You can either fill in the questions that Claude provided or give your facts.
I wrote all the facts in the next prompt.
PROMPT 2 –
The client, Manny D’Cruz, operates a business under the name Koko, which uses a distinctive logo comprising a stylish letter ‘K’. Koko is a registered trademark, duly registered under the relevant provisions of trademark law, and is used in connection with shirts and t-shirts in its designated class, which is class 25. It is a fashion brand. The trademark Koko has gained distinctiveness and goodwill in the market through consistent use in both online and offline retail environments. The trademark has been in use since March 2023.
It has come to the attention of the client (on may 28th 2025) that a third party, Sheela M, is using a deceptively similar mark in connection with similar goods such as in caps, shirts and also accessories such as cups, and bottles, thereby infringing upon the registered trademark rights of the client. The infringing mark has been observed in use both in physical stores and on online platforms such as Amazon and Flipkart, contributing to potential and actual consumer confusion. No prior communication has taken place between the client and Sheela M regarding the use of the infringing mark.
The client demands that Sheela M immediately cease and desist from using the infringing mark, in any form, whether online or offline, to prevent further damage to the trademark and brand identity of Koko. There has also been an estimated financial harm of Rs. 2,00,000 and dilution of brand value.
The first draft can be found here.
Step 3: Making improvements
This is a good draft, but I am not completely satisfied as it is missing –
Trademark registration details:
The draft did not specify the trademark registration number, class of goods/services, or the date of registration. These details are crucial because they establish the legal strength of the client’s rights.
Jurisdiction not stated:
The draft did not mention the relevant court jurisdiction where potential legal proceedings could be initiated. This is important because it reminds the infringer of the geographical scope and authority of enforcement.
Confidentiality clause:
The notice does not include a confidentiality clause to prevent the recipient from publicising the dispute, which could further harm the brand’s reputation.
Request for destruction or delivery of infringing goods:
The letter demands discontinuation of infringing products but does not explicitly request the destruction or delivery of existing infringing inventory to the trademark owner. This is a common demand in trademark cases to ensure infringing goods are removed from circulation.
Claude provided an excellent base but left out critical details that only a human lawyer can supply. These gaps show why AI cannot (yet) replace professional judgment in legal drafting.
As the lawyer, you must fill these missing pieces, ensuring that the final notice fully reflects the legal rights, commercial reality, and enforcement strategy of the client.
Another important aspect to note is that I missed out on giving all the possible information to Claude. And this can happen to you as well. But you need to use your judgment and find out what is missing in the draft. Once you notice it, you can get AI to fix that or incorporate those missed details.
So I did the following prompt –
PROMPT 3 –
Retain the current draft. Incorporate the following changes.
Add the trademark registration number and date of registration to establish the legal basis clearly. Koko, registered under Trademark No. 897654321 dated 01/03/2023 under Class 25 of the Trademarks Act, 1999. Jurisdiction will be Mumbai, India. Extend compliance from 7 days to 14 days
Add a confidentiality clause.
Request for destruction or delivery of infringing goods
Following is the final draft with a human touch. You can see the additions I made to the draft; they will be marked in red for your understanding.
CEASE AND DESIST LETTER
Date: 10.06.2025
TO: Ms. Sheela M
#123, Juhu Tara road,
Santacruz (west),
Mumbai -400049
Date: 10.06.2025
FROM: Mr. Manny D’Cruz
Manny D’Cruz
Proprietor, KOKO
#950, Soul Plaza,
Soul Industrial Estate,
New Link Road, Andheri West- 400053
Subject: Unauthorised Use of Registered Trademark “KOKO” – Immediate Cease and Desist
Dear Ms. Sheela M,
We represent Mr. Manny D’Cruz, the owner and operator of the fashion brand “Koko” (the “Client”). This letter serves as formal notice of your unauthorised use of our Client’s registered trademark and constitutes a demand that you immediately cease and desist from all infringing activities.
Our Client is the rightful owner of the registered trademark “KOKO” along with its distinctive stylised letter ‘K’ logo (collectively, the “KOKO Mark”). The KOKO Mark is duly registered under Trademark Registration No. 897654321 dated March 1, 2023, under Class 25 of the Trademarks Act, 1999, specifically covering shirts and t-shirts.
The KOKO Mark has been in continuous commercial use since March 2023, achieving significant market recognition through sales exceeding ₹50,00,000 annually and a social media following of 3,80,000. The brand is in connection with fashion merchandise and has gained substantial distinctiveness and goodwill in the marketplace through consistent use in both online and offline retail environments. Our Client has invested considerable time, effort, and resources in developing and promoting the KOKO brand, which has established recognition and reputation among consumers in the fashion industry.
It has come to our Client’s attention, as of May 28, 2025, that you are using a mark that is deceptively similar to the registered KOKO Mark in connection with goods that are identical or closely related to those covered by our Client’s trademark registration. Specifically, you are using the infringing mark in connection with caps, shirts and accessories, including cups and bottles. This infringing mark, observed on Amazon (ASIN 893728201), Flipkart, and physical retail stores, is deceptively similar to our Client’s registered KOKO Mark and creates a likelihood of consumer confusion.
Your unauthorised use of the infringing mark has been observed in multiple commercial channels, including physical retail stores, online platforms, including Amazon and Flipkart and other commercial venues.
Your unauthorised use of a mark confusingly similar to the registered KOKO Mark constitutes trademark infringement under applicable trademark laws. Your actions create a likelihood of confusion among consumers as to the source, origin, sponsorship, or affiliation of your goods with our Client’s established KOKO brand.
Furthermore, your continued use of the infringing mark:
- Dilutes the distinctive character and commercial value of the KOKO Mark
- Causes consumer confusion and deception
- Unfairly trades upon the goodwill and reputation established by our Client
- Results in actual and potential financial harm to our Client’s business
As a direct result of your infringing activities, our Client has suffered:
- Estimated financial damages of ₹2,00,000 (Rupees Two Lakhs)
- Dilution of brand value and market position
- Consumer confusion and potential loss of customers
- Damage to the distinctive character and goodwill of the KOKO Mark
Based on the foregoing, we hereby DEMAND that you immediately:
Cease and desist from any and all use of the KOKO mark or any confusingly similar variation thereof, whether in identical or modified form; discontinue the manufacture, distribution, advertising, promotion, or sale of any goods bearing the infringing mark. Remove all infringing materials from online platforms, including but not limited to Amazon, Flipkart, and any other e-commerce websites and withdraw all infringing products from physical retail locations and cease any further distribution;
Destroy or deliver all remaining inventory of goods bearing the infringing mark in your possession, custody, or control, and provide written confirmation of such destruction or delivery to our Client and provide assurance in writing that you will refrain from any future use of the KOKO mark or any confusingly similar marks.
Provide details of sales and profits derived from the infringing goods to facilitate settlement discussions, failing which our client may seek an account of profits through legal proceedings.
You have FOURTEEN (14) DAYS from the date of receipt of this letter to comply fully with the above demands and provide written confirmation of your compliance.
Please be advised that trademark infringement is a serious legal matter. If you fail to comply with this cease and desist demand within the specified timeframe, our Client will have no alternative but to pursue all available legal remedies, including but not limited to:
- Filing a lawsuit for trademark infringement in the appropriate courts having jurisdiction in Mumbai, India
- Seeking preliminary and permanent injunctive relief
- Claiming monetary damages, including actual damages and profits
- Seeking statutory damages where applicable under the Trademarks Act, 1999
- Requesting attorney’s fees and costs
- Pursuing any other relief deemed appropriate by the court
Our Client is fully prepared to enforce its trademark rights through litigation if necessary, and will not hesitate to do so to protect its valuable intellectual property.
Nothing in this letter shall be construed as a waiver of any rights or remedies available to our Client, all of which are expressly reserved. This letter is written without prejudice to our Client’s position and rights in any future legal proceedings.
This communication and the subject matter hereof are confidential and proprietary. You are requested to maintain strict confidentiality regarding the contents of this letter and the underlying dispute. Any disclosure of this communication or its contents to third parties, except to your legal counsel for the purpose of seeking legal advice, is strictly prohibited without our prior written consent.
If you wish to discuss this matter or believe there has been any misunderstanding, please contact the undersigned immediately. We are willing to discuss an amicable resolution, but time is of the essence.
We trust that you will give this matter your immediate attention and look forward to your prompt compliance with our demands.
Sincerely,
Ashok Ghosh,
Advocate for Mr. Manny D’Cruz
ABC Law Firm,
On behalf of Mr. Manny D’Cruz
Contact Information:
Email: _____
Phone no _____
Limitations and cautions while using AI for legal drafting
While AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude can save you time and help structure a legally sound document, they are no substitute for your legal expertise. You must approach AI-generated drafts with caution because machines cannot yet replace human judgment, strategy, or a deep understanding of legal context.
Here are some of the important limitations and risks you should be aware of:
1. Lack of jurisdiction-specific nuance
AI may generate content based on general legal principles, but it can miss jurisdiction-specific requirements. For example, trademark laws and procedural expectations in India may differ from those in the United States or the United Kingdom, and AI does not always reflect these differences accurately unless specifically prompted.
2. Insufficient commercial judgment
AI cannot assess your client’s business priorities, the value of the relationship with the infringer, or the broader strategy behind sending a notice. A human lawyer may decide to soften the tone, suggest negotiation, or consider settlement, all of which require discretion and experience.
3. Risk of outdated or incorrect legal references
Unless explicitly instructed, AI may not refer to the latest case law or amendments. For example, if a recent judgment clarified a provision of the Trademarks Act, 1999, AI may overlook this unless you specify it.
4. Missing factual verification
AI trusts what you provide. If the details you enter are incomplete, inaccurate, or based on assumptions, the draft produced will reflect those errors. Only you, the lawyer, can verify facts like trademark registration status, correct class descriptions, and the infringer’s actual identity.
5. No control over tone and strategic positioning unless guided carefully
ChatGPT, Claude, etc, will draft in a formal, neutral tone by default. If you want a notice that is more aggressive, more conciliatory, or tailored for a particular commercial relationship, you must instruct it clearly or manually revise the output.
6. Potential confidentiality concerns
Sharing sensitive client information with online AI tools raises confidentiality and data security issues. Always check your firm’s or jurisdiction’s ethical guidelines before using AI for real client matters.
What does this mean for you?
Use AI-generated drafts as a starting point, not a final product. Think of them as useful scaffolding, but the building itself must be designed, checked, and finalised by you, the human lawyer.
Only you can tailor the notice to the client’s specific goals, decide on the appropriate legal tone and ensure compliance with local laws and ethical obligations.
Conclusion: Can you trust AI with first drafts in IP law?
So, can you truly rely on AI tools like Claude to draft your first cease and desist notice for trademark infringement? The answer is yes, but with caution.
As you have seen in this demonstration, AI can help you overcome the dreaded blank page syndrome. It prompts you to think of all the key details, structures your content like a trained lawyer would, and gives you a solid working draft in minutes. This can save time, improve efficiency, and allow you to focus your energy on finer aspects like tone, legal risk, and client strategy.
But AI is not perfect. It does not know your client’s commercial realities. It cannot interpret new case law or regulatory changes unless you guide it. Most importantly, it cannot make judgment calls, a critical part of any lawyer’s work. The first draft you get from Claude is just that: a first draft. You must review it, tweak it, and ensure that it serves your client’s exact interests.
In short, you can use AI as your silent, fast-working junior, but yes, you are still the lawyer who holds the pen on the final version.
Use this tool wisely, and you will find that it enhances, rather than replaces, your professional skills.
Allow notifications
