Thom Browne’s signature graphic language became the subject of a major trademark confrontation with Adidas. Browne’s brand had long used a three-bar motif on its clothing, but changed to a four-stripe design after Adidas objected in 2007. The dispute escalated in 2021, when Adidas sued, arguing that Thom Browne’s four-bar and grosgrain stripe patterns—particularly on shoes and upscale activewear—were too close to Adidas’s famous three-stripe marks and could confuse consumers. The case exposed the tension between mass-market sportswear trademarks and luxury fashion’s practice of transforming athletic codes into expensive status symbols. In 2023, a jury rejected Adidas’s claims, finding that Thom Browne’s designs were not likely to cause customer confusion and did not infringe Adidas’s trademark rights. The verdict allowed Browne to continue using the stripe system that had become central to his tailored-sportswear identity, while underscoring that visual resemblance alone does not establish infringement when branding, price point, construction, and market context distinguish the products.
Preparing the daily feature…
AI concept artworkArchive Record · 2020s
The Stripe War: Adidas Takes Thom Browne to Trial Over Four-Bar Luxury Sportswear
Thom Browne and Adidas / 2020s
Thom Browne’s signature graphic language became the subject of a major trademark confrontation with Adidas. Browne’s brand had long used a three-bar motif on its clothing, but changed to a four-stripe design after Adidas objected in 2007. The dispute escalated in 2021, when Adidas sued, arguing that Thom Browne’s four-bar and grosgrain stripe patterns—particularly on shoes and upscale activewear—were too close to Adidas’s famous three-stripe marks and could confuse consumers. The case exposed the tension between mass-market sportswear trademarks and luxury fashion’s practice of transforming athletic codes into expensive status symbols. In 2023, a jury rejected Adidas’s claims, finding that Thom Browne’s designs were not likely to cause customer confusion and did not infringe Adidas’s trademark rights. The verdict allowed Browne to continue using the stripe system that had become central to his tailored-sportswear identity, while underscoring that visual resemblance alone does not establish infringement when branding, price point, construction, and market context distinguish the products.
The daily editorial is currently unavailable. There’s still an entire archive to explore.