Skip to content

Can a Ubiquitous Brand With Stripes Claim Trademark Infringement on All Striped Logos? Adidas v. Thom Browne Says No

February 7, 2023

This past month, Adidas lost its highly publicized trademark infringement lawsuit against luxury fashion brand, Thom Browne. The lawsuit stemmed from Thom Browne’s use of a “four stripe” logo design eerily similar to the “three strip” logo made famous and used by Adidas since the 1950’s.

The case was commenced in 2021 by Adidas in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. In its complaint, Adidas claimed that Thom Browne’s design was too similar to Adidas’ well-known “three stripe” mark and is likely to confuse consumers, given that Thom Browne’s design was being used on athleisurewear such as shoes, shirts and pants. However, as Thom Browne noted during closing arguments: “Adidas does not own stripes.”

Trademark laws are used to protect not only brands, but also to prevent confusion for consumers in the marketplace. When a party receives trademark protection, it has the exclusive right to use a logo or brand, and as a result, consumers can more easily identify the source and associated quality of the branded products.

Here, Adidas’ trademark is limited to three stripes that it uses identically under almost every circumstance. In fact, Adidas places highly specific limitations on how the mark can be used by its designers, as it only allows the logo to be tilted up to 20 degrees or vertically. Due to this rigid use of the mark, as well as the price differential between Adidas and Thom Browne products (which can cost upward of $3,000 per garment), the jury determined that the public could not possibly mistake Thom Browne products with Adidas.

As a result of the decision, Thom Browne is now permitted to continue to sell its products containing the “four stripe” mark and the strength of Adidas’ “three stripe” mark as a source indicator has likely been diminished. The decision is also likely to have implications for other fashion and sportswear brands that use or would like to use design elements such as sequential stripes on their clothing or logos.

The views and opinions expressed in the article represent the view of the authors and not necessarily the official view of Clark Hill PLC. Nothing in this article constitutes professional legal advice nor is it intended to be a substitute for professional legal advice. 

Subscribe for the latest

Subscribe

Related

Legal Updates

SBA Plans Stricter Limitations-on-Subcontracting For Set-Aside Contracts - Construction Contractors Should Take Particular Note

SBA plans to revise limitations on subcontracting rules for small business set-asides, with new thresholds, oversight, reporting, and enforcement ahead.

Explore more
Legal Updates

Intellectual Property Rights and Instruments of Service

Frequently on construction projects, design professionals such as architects and engineers are retained to invest substantial professional skill, time, and resources in creating drawings, specifications, calculations, models, and other documents. These materials are commonly known as “instruments of service” and are often mischaracterized as simple deliverables. However,  instruments of service embody design decisions, technical knowledge, original expression, and, increasingly, complex digital information.  

Explore more
Legal Updates

FTC Issues Section 6 Pricing Inquiry on Pricing and Compensation

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has expanded its focus on personalized pricing beyond consumer transactions and into worker compensation. Through a new inquiry targeting major airlines, ride-share companies, and food-delivery platforms, the FTC is examining how companies use personal data, algorithms, and other technologies to determine both consumer pricing and gig-worker pay. This development signals a significant shift in regulatory scrutiny and raises important compliance considerations for businesses navigating a growing patchwork of state and local personalized pricing laws.

Explore more