Adidas has launched legal action in Australia’s Federal Court against online fashion retailer White Fox, alleging that clothing featuring four parallel stripes infringes its famous three-stripe trademark and could mislead consumers into believing the products are connected to or approved by Adidas, according to court reports. Adidas claims White Fox continued selling and promoting the disputed designs despite repeated requests to stop dating back to March. In court documents, the German company argues that its three-stripe design has a substantial and valuable reputation in Australia, where it says the trademark has been registered for more than half a century, and alleges that White Fox has been selling and advertising clothing featuring four parallel stripes of equal width since at least March, in designs it calls substantially identical with or otherwise deceptively similar to its own. Adidas is seeking damages, including profits earned from the disputed products, along with interest and legal costs, and orders to stop White Fox selling the products. At the first mention of the case, Adidas’s barrister argued the Sydney-based company had been using the stripes as a trademark for months, pointing to a picture of a White Fox-endorsed influencer wearing four-stripe shorts with genuine Adidas shoes, promotion he said would confuse consumers, and contending there was an intention to trade off Adidas’s reputation. Adidas also alleges that advertisements for the striped clothing featured models wearing genuine Adidas products, and, in some accounts of the filings, that images were digitally altered to remove a stripe, claims White Fox has not been shown to accept. White Fox’s barrister said the company would argue the four stripes on its clothing are simply decorative rather than a trademark, highlighted similar four-stripe items sold by other brands including Princess Polly, Glassons and Shein, and turned Adidas’s own slogan against it: it is the brand with three stripes, emphasis on the three. The case, first mentioned on 9 October with a hearing expected in early 2027, is not uncharted territory. Adidas successfully sued another retailer in Australia in 2013 over shoes bearing four stripes, and in 2023 won against Pacific Brands over four-stripe Dunlop and Grosby shoes, although it lost elements of a legal battle with Thom Browne over four stripes in 2025 and was denied broader three-stripe trademarks in the EU in 2019. That mixed record is precisely why the case matters beyond two clothing brands. Adidas’s three stripes are among the most recognised design marks in global commerce, and the company’s enforcement strategy treats any parallel-stripe design on apparel as a dilution threat. White Fox, a fast-fashion label founded in Sydney that expanded rapidly in Australia and the United States, is testing whether adding a fourth stripe, and treating the motif as decoration, places a design outside that protection. Trademark law’s central question, likelihood of confusion, will likely turn on the evidence Adidas gathered by purchasing products and photographing advertising on Sydney’s public transport network, and on whether the influencer imagery really suggested endorsement. No court has yet ruled that White Fox infringed. For now, the dispute is a reminder that in fashion, where design elements are few and famous ones are fewer, a single stripe can be worth a federal court case, and that the value of a brand built over seventy years is defended one lawsuit at a time.
Related reading: 24World Media Launches Central Newsroom Linking Its Flagship Outlets · TA Associates Signs $535 Million Sale of Rocscience to Hexagon, Report Says · Airtel Money Prices London IPO at £1.96 a Share in $7 Billion Listing
1 Comment