The legal battle between two fashion giants, Adidas and Thom Browne, has escalated further as they sue each other over the right to use stripes on their clothing and accessories. On one side is Adidas, which since 1952 on footwear and since 1967 on clothing has as its trademark the Three Stripes logo: the three parallel stripes we know well, a logo that is registered and recognized in many countries, Europe and Protection of international trademark registrations. Thom Browne, on the other hand, rejected Adidas' accusations of logo abuse and imitation that bordered on plagiarism.
Recently, there has been a surprising development in the lawsuit between Adidas and Thom Browne: Thom Browne, a New York-based fashion brand, requested to revoke the registration of the three-stripes logo by the sporting goods giant.
Adidas is annoyed that, despite Thom Browne being aware of Adidas' rights to the famous three-stripes trademark, its product range has expanded far beyond formal wear and workwear and now offers and sells sports-inspired clothing. and footwear with two, three or four parallel stripes, in a manner very similar to Adidas' three-stripe trademark. So the core of the accusation is that Thom Browne "invaded" Adidas' key market - sports and leisure, TB's sponsorship cooperation with FC Barcelona from the 2018/2019 season has made it openly promote the use of football-related images, even including those sponsored by Adidas Many football players, including the much-anticipated Messi.
According to the latest The Fashion Law report, this legal battle has entered a new climax with Thom Browne’s severe counterattack. The American brand asked the New York court to cancel the registration of Adidas' three-stripes logo, just as the European Court of Justice ruled that Adidas's "three-stripes" trademark was invalid in 2019 because the stripes constituted only an ordinary figurative trademark without distinctive features. . For Brown, it's the same argument: stripes used by different brands, "merely decorative and/or aesthetically functional", do not constitute a "mark of origin". Who will win the final victory? Let's wait and see.