In brief
Adidas has filed a lawsuit against Australian fast‑fashion label White Fox for using a four‑stripe pattern that the German sportswear giant says mimics its iconic three‑stripe logo. The court case began after Adidas warned White Fox in March to stop selling and advertising its striped apparel, but the brand ignored the request. Adidas claims the design could mislead consumers into thinking the two brands are linked, while White Fox argues its stripes are a distinct style. The dispute highlights growing tensions around trademark protection in the global fashion market. As the case moves to federal court, fans and industry insiders alike are watching closely for how trademark law interprets visual similarity.
Adidas is suing the Aussie fast‑fashion brand White Fox after the company began selling clothes with a four‑stripe design that the German giant says looks "deceptively similar" to its own coveted three‑stripe logo.
Adidas warned White Fox in March to stop selling and advertising the striped pieces, but the Sydney‑based brand kept going. Now the case is moving into the Federal Court of Australia.
Under trademark law, the key question is whether the design can mislead consumers into thinking there is an association or approval between the two brands. Adidas argues that the extra stripe could give shoppers the wrong idea that its brand is involved, especially because White Fox’s ads often show people wearing genuine Adidas items.
White Fox, founded in 2013 by Greek‑Australian couple Georgia and Daniel Contos, has grown fast, with revenue jumping from $121 m in 2022 to AU$542 m this year. The brand is popular with teens and young adults in Australia, the UK, and the US.
Adidas, which pulled in €24.8 bn in 2025, is seeking damages that include White Fox’s profits from the striped products plus interest and legal costs.
Eye‑catching evidence for the case shows side‑by‑side photos of Adidas products next to White Fox clothes, and images of the four‑stripe shirts shown on bus‑stop billboards and through influencer posts.
The court will decide if the design is a breach of trademark law — a fight that could set a precedent for how iconic logos are protected worldwide.
