Zioness Movement Loses Baseless Lawsuit Against The Lawfare Project
The Lawfare Project (“LP”) is proud to announce a decisive legal victory in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in a case filed against it by Zioness Movement, Inc. (“ZMI”). The appellate court affirmed that LP is a co-owner of the ZIONESS trademark—rejecting ZMI’s demand to be declared the sole owner—and upheld the jury’s verdict in our favor.
This ruling concludes years of litigation that began when ZMI wrongfully sued The Lawfare Project after LP sought to protect its rights in the ZIONESS name, which LP had conceived, funded, and launched as an initiative to combat Jew-hatred and anti-Zionist sentiment in progressive spaces.
The Second Circuit’s decision confirms:
LP’s co-ownership of the ZIONESS trademark. The court found there was “ample evidence” supporting the jury’s conclusion that both organizations own the mark, citing LP's pivotal role in creating and funding the movement in its early days.
No legal error in the trial court’s judgment. ZMI’s attempts to overturn the verdict were rejected, with the court noting that co-ownership is permissible under trademark law.
ZMI’s claim for attorneys’ fees appeared to be inflated. The appellate court upheld the trial court’s finding that ZMI’s asserted discovery-related expenses were “not credible” and appeared to have been exaggerated in an effort to seek a heightened monetary sanction.
“When I first founded the Zioness movement, my vision was for a truly inclusive, unapologetically Jewish organization—one committed to defending Jewish civil rights and uniting Jews of all backgrounds in the shared pursuit of our people’s safety, dignity, and future," said Brooke Goldstein, Founder and Executive Director of The Lawfare Project. "Sadly, Zioness departed from that mission, transforming into a political mouthpiece for some of the most radical elements of the 'progressive' movement. This shift alienated many Jews and, at times, undermined our collective interests — taking divisive, partisan stances that ran counter to Jewish unity and, at times, to Jewish security itself."
Goldstein continued, "That chapter ends today. Going forward, the Zioness name will stand for what it was always intended to represent: Jewish unity, Jewish empowerment, and an unwavering commitment to the civil rights of our people.”
Darren Oved, Terrence Oved, Aaron Solomon, and Timothy Savitsky of Oved & Oved, which represented The Lawfare Project, commented: "Congratulations to Brooke Goldstein and The Lawfare Project. This seminal decision is an acknowledgement by the Second Circuit not only of an important tenant of trademark law, but of The Lawfare Project's crucial role in incubating and setting the creative trajectory of the Zioness movement. This ruling ensures that charitable organizations like The Lawfare Project can protect their messaging and internally developed intellectual property. We are proud to have helped Brooke and The Lawfare Project achieve those laudable goals.”
Benjamin Ryberg, COO and Director of Research of The Lawfare Project, added: “The Lawfare Project was sued simply for protecting what it helped build. The jury’s verdict and the appellate court’s decision confirm the facts: The Lawfare Project is a co-owner of the ZIONESS trademark, and the plaintiff’s inflated legal fee claims were properly rejected.”
With this ruling, the Zioness name can return to its founding mission: advancing Jewish unity, empowerment, and civil rights—core principles of The Lawfare Project and the global End Jew Hatred movement.