Adidas sues White Fox over four-stripe designs in Federal Court trademark fight

Why This Matters

• The case will test whether trademark protection for three parallel stripes extends to a four-stripe design, a question the registration itself may not answer directly.
• For Australian fast fashion labels, the ruling could clarify how closely they can mimic established sportswear branding without facing infringement action.
• For Adidas, it follows a 2019 court defeat over the same mark, reported under the headline "Too ordinary: Adidas loses trademark battle over its three stripes."

Background

The three-stripe mark has been a signature of Adidas products for decades, and the company regularly enforces it around the world. In Australian trademark law, a registered mark is infringed by a sign that is substantially identical or deceptively similar, but courts can find that simple, commonplace design elements are too ordinary to be owned outright. That tension sits at the centre of the White Fox case, with legal expert Michael Handler among those noting the registered mark does not expressly cover four stripes.

Key Perspectives

Adidas: Argues White Fox used the stripes as a trademark, that four stripes are deceptively similar to its registered three, and that White Fox capitalised on its reputation in breach of consumer law.

Professor Michael Handler (UNSW): Notes the registration is silent on four stripes, and Adidas has itself conceded one or two stripes are available to other brands.

Skeptics: The 2019 case, in which Adidas lost a trademark battle over its three stripes, shows courts are willing to treat simple stripe designs as too ordinary for exclusive trademark protection.

What to Watch

• The Federal Court hearing scheduled for early next year, where the similarity of the two designs will be tested.
• Whether the case settles before trial, and on what terms.
• The judgment's broader effect on how trademark law applies to variations of a registered design in the fashion industry.