Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has noted in Liu v. SEC (2020) that disgorgement is simply another term for restitution, and is subject to equitable limitations.
[3] The second edition of American Jurisprudence states that: Disgorgement is an equitable remedy designed to deter future violations of the securities laws and to deprive defendants of the proceeds of their wrongful conduct.
[4]Although not labelled "disgorgement," recovery of profits from the wrongful use of a patent or copyright belonging to another person or entity has a long history in US law.
The US Supreme Court, in Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp., 309 U.S. 390, 399-400 (1940), stated: Prior to the Copyright Act of 1909, there had been no statutory provision for the recovery of profits, but that recovery had been allowed in equity both in copyright and patent cases as appropriate equitable relief incident to a decree for an injunction.... That relief had been given in accordance with the principles governing equity jurisdiction, not to inflict punishment but to prevent an unjust enrichment by allowing injured complainants to claim "that which, ex aequo et bono, is theirs, and nothing beyond this."...
"[9] Disgorgement payments to the SEC have for decades been considered completely equitable and compensatory and thus deductible under the Internal Revenue Code.