Adidas sues shoemaker, says rival’s stripes are too similar
Big things are afoot in Portland, Ore. Athletic merchandise giant Adidas AG filed a lawsuit this week in federal court seeking to stop a skateboarding equipment maker and regional sporting goods retail chain from selling shoes allegedly too similar in design to its own.
May 18, 2012 at 08:06 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Big things are afoot in Portland, Ore. Athletic merchandise giant Adidas AG filed a lawsuit this week in federal court seeking to stop a skateboarding equipment maker and regional sporting goods retail chain from selling shoes allegedly too similar in design to its own.
Adidas claims that World Industries Inc.'s shoes, which have a trident-shaped, three-parallel-line, “W” logo on their sides, are too similar to their own iconic three-stripe motif. The German shoe brand says that World Industries' shoes are knockoffs and infringe on many of its trademarks. Adidas first used the three-stripe logo in 1952 and started trademarking it in the U.S. in 1994.
Big 5 Sporting Goods Corp. also is caught in the line of fire. Adidas added the regional sporting goods retailer to its complaint after it released an advertisement with Adidas' shoes adjacent to World Industries' shoes, both of which featured similar three-stripe designs.
“World Industries' merchandise is likely to cause consumer confusion, deceive the public regarding its source, and dilute and tarnish the distinctive quality of Adidas' Three-Stripe Mark,” Adidas said in the complaint.
Adidas seeks monetary damages, to stop the sale of the infringing shoes and to have them destroyed.
The shoemaker has filed a series of similar lawsuits in recent years against other retailers, including Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Adidas said Wal-Mart sold knockoffs with two or four parallel stripes.
Additionally, in 2008, Adidas was awarded $65.3 million by a federal judge in a trademark case against Payless ShoeSource Inc. The award was a vast reduction of an earlier, $305 million award by a jury. However, the companies eventually reached a confidential settlement.
For more on the lawsuit, read Reuters.
Big things are afoot in Portland, Ore. Athletic merchandise giant Adidas AG filed a lawsuit this week in federal court seeking to stop a skateboarding equipment maker and regional sporting goods retail chain from selling shoes allegedly too similar in design to its own.
Adidas claims that World Industries Inc.'s shoes, which have a trident-shaped, three-parallel-line, “W” logo on their sides, are too similar to their own iconic three-stripe motif. The German shoe brand says that World Industries' shoes are knockoffs and infringe on many of its trademarks. Adidas first used the three-stripe logo in 1952 and started trademarking it in the U.S. in 1994.
Big 5 Sporting Goods Corp. also is caught in the line of fire. Adidas added the regional sporting goods retailer to its complaint after it released an advertisement with Adidas' shoes adjacent to World Industries' shoes, both of which featured similar three-stripe designs.
“World Industries' merchandise is likely to cause consumer confusion, deceive the public regarding its source, and dilute and tarnish the distinctive quality of Adidas' Three-Stripe Mark,” Adidas said in the complaint.
Adidas seeks monetary damages, to stop the sale of the infringing shoes and to have them destroyed.
The shoemaker has filed a series of similar lawsuits in recent years against other retailers, including
Additionally, in 2008, Adidas was awarded $65.3 million by a federal judge in a trademark case against Payless ShoeSource Inc. The award was a vast reduction of an earlier, $305 million award by a jury. However, the companies eventually reached a confidential settlement.
For more on the lawsuit, read Reuters.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Lululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute read
Old Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
Trending Stories
- 1DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 2GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 3Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
- 4Warner Bros. Accused of Misleading Investors on NBA Talks
- 5FTC Settles With Security Firm Over AI Claims Under Agency's Compliance Program
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
