Coach Services designs, markets, and sells a variety of trademarked products.

Goodfellow owns and operates a flea market and collects rent from $75$ to $100$ booth vendors who sell various products there. On numerous occasions, Coach sent letters to Goodfellow, notifying him of counterfeit sales of Coach trademarked products at many of the booths. On several occasions, law enforcement officers raided the flea market and seized thousands of counterfeit products. Despite all this, Goodfellow made no real effort to prevent the booth vendors from violating Coach's trademark. Coach then sued Goodfellow for violation of its trademark. Goodfellow defended on the grounds that the Lanham Act $($which protects trademark rights$)$ allows recovery against an infringer who used the mark in commerce without authorization. However, the statute says nothing about liability for contributory infringement$-$the liability of persons who permit or induce others to infringe a trademark. Explain the process by which a court might find Goodfellow liable despite the absence of a statutory provision prohibiting contributory infringement.