Düsseldorf Court Draws Lines in the Brand War Between Adidas and Nike

In the trademark dispute over the characteristic side stripe design, the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf has delivered a groundbreaking verdict. At the center of the legal battle: five specific Nike trousers, whose design stripes might remind too closely of the well-known Adidas trademark. The court's findings are clear and unambiguous: One of the contested sports trousers, specifically the "LA Lakers Courtside Pants," may not be sold in Germany any further due to its overly clear similarity to the competitor's iconic three-stripe concept. For the remaining four models, however, the court has dismissed the allegations made by Adidas, thereby modifying the judgment of the first instance. It is evidenced that fine distinctions have significant implications. Thus, the court has made differentiated evaluations for the cleared trousers: In three cases, the signature Nike "Swoosh," combined with only two side stripes, ensures that no trademark infringement is seen. The fourth pair of trousers, despite a three-stripe pattern, escapes the suspicion of brand confusion due to the English arrangement of the stripes and the design in the club colors of a football team. According to the court, these design subtleties dispel any potential risk of confusion. This stripe conflict is part of a series of similar disputes between the two sporting goods manufacturers and beyond their industry boundaries. Sometimes more, sometimes less successfully, the competitors fight for the uniqueness of their brand presence. A look back reveals the significance of such disputes: the Court of Justice of the European Union had already curtailed Adidas's claim to universal protection for the three-stripe mark in 2019. Another incident from 2005 completes the picture of ongoing disputes, notably between Adidas and Nike. This latest court decision, concerning trademark milestones for stripes on sportswear, is final and leaves no further room for appeals. For sports marketing players, such landmark decisions are increasingly drawing a line that seeks to protect creative freedom and brand rights alike.