Lawsuits

Adidas Sues Aussie Retailer White Fox Over Four Stripes

Is protecting a brand's stripes defending hard-won identity from dilution or bullying smaller labels over basic geometry?

1 hour ago·Updated 56 minutes ago

Adidas Sues Aussie Retailer White Fox Over Four Stripes

Story

Above: A White Fox ad on a bus in London on May 7, 2025. Image credit: Mike Kemp/Getty Images

The Facts

Sportswear company Adidas sued Sydney-based fashion retailer White Fox Boutique in the Federal Court of Australia on Sept. 18, in a lawsuit first made public on Friday, alleging that clothing bearing a four-stripe design is deceptively similar to the German company's trademarked three stripes.
News.com.au
7NEWS
Independent
A lawyer for Adidas, Patrick Flynn told the court Friday that White Fox had used the stripes as a trademark for months and that there was "an intention to trade off our reputation." Justice Ian Jackman set a hearing for early 2027.
The West Australian
CNN
Lawyers for White Fox denied infringement and said they would argue the four stripes are decorative rather than a trademark, with barrister Ed Heerey noting similar striped items sold by Princess Polly, Glassons, Shein and Cotton On.
The Guardian
The West Australian
Origo Hungary
Adidas also claims White Fox advertising implied a link between the brands, citing a product image of a model in White Fox socks and pink Adidas shoes that was later altered to remove stripes. It is seeking damages, profits, interest and legal costs.
Independent
Origo Hungary
News.com.au
Adidas has held its three-stripe trademark in Australia for more than 50 years and won a 2013 case against Pacific Brands over shoes bearing four stripes. It recently lost infringement cases against luxury label Thom Browne in the U.S., U.K. and Germany.
The West Australian
CNN
White Fox Boutique was launched in Sydney in 2013 by Georgia and Daniel Contos, who own it with Daniel's mother Melina Maceri, and generated $542 million in revenue in the year to June 2025. Adidas reported $39.9 billion in revenue in 2025.
News.com.au
7NEWS
The Guardian

Sources Split

LEFT

CENTER

RIGHT

ESTAB
CRIT

CENTER

PRO
ESTAB

The Spin

Narrative A

Decades of investment and millions in brand building deserve protection, and letting rivals ride that goodwill with a near-identical stripe scheme guts the whole point of a trademark. Shoppers can spot a knockoff and still watch a brand's identity get watered down, which is exactly the harm the law exists to stop. Failure to stop this will reward whoever copies fastest.

BakerHostetler

Court Listener

Narrative B

Nobody gets to own a stripe, and counting to four is well within the abilities of the average shopper. Trademark law exists so buyers can identify a source, and stretching it to cover any arrangement of parallel lines hands giants a monopoly over basic geometry. Endless suits aimed at smaller labels amount to bullying with a legal budget.