The More Famous Brands Are, The More Natural Strokes Are, And Adi Drives Nike.

The more reputable brands are, the more natural strokes they have in the rights protection team. After all, they are leading the market trend, and have trained a large number of loyal fans.

However, if you want to choose a trump army, you must be a Adidas.

To a certain extent, Adidas can be regarded as a company active in the indictment, and their legal departments should be as busy as marketing departments.

The so-called "big tree" attracts the wind. "Plagiarism" seems to be an unavoidable topic in the sporting goods industry with brand names.

In fact, as an industry leading by product design, the issue of intellectual property rights has always been extremely sensitive, and there are too many vague areas to be controlled accurately.

Therefore, various "infringement cases" and "plagiarism" incidents emerge in endlessly.

There are numerous brands of Adidas's "hand ripped" brand. Most of the major events are focused on the embezzlement of its classic "three bars" trademark.

In fact, there are three brands of Adidas strictly speaking, in addition to the most well-known "three bars", and the classic series of "clover" and the main fashion label Adidas Style, its LOGO is a global shape, its brand has Y-3 and NEO, which we know better.

However, any trademark has the brand patent of Adidas.

It is not unusual for big international brands to encounter brand infringement in China, and more phenomena are represented as "Shanzhai". Nike, Jordan, New Balance and Under Armour are hard to escape from the fate of Shanzhai, Adidas is also naturally not immune.

Adidas once fought a protracted war with the domestic brand Adi Wang. This is an obvious brand Shanzhai case. However, due to the particularity of Chinese law, such cases will always cause people to suffer a lot.

From the results, we can not say that Adidas has won a comprehensive victory.

The lawsuit lasted for five years and ended in reconciliation.

Adi Wang gave up the original brand LOGO and Chinese trademark, but Adidas did not receive corresponding financial compensation.

In other words, ADI has gained huge economic benefits through several years of operation, but these interests are not related to Adidas in principle.

Judging from the development trend of the industry, it is very difficult for the sports goods brand, such as Adi Wang, with limited brand value to have long-term development.

Adidas has spent a lot of energy killing a counterfeit brand, but for itself, the hidden loss of brand is inestimable.

The incident of "Adi Wang" has sounded the alarm for Adidas who aims to open up the Chinese market. "Shanzhai" can be said to have been eradicated, but trademark rights protection has never been relaxed.

Not long ago, Adidas also sued a trade company in Wenzhou for trademark infringement. The claim amount was as high as 3 million yuan. This is also the trademark dispute case that Adidas first requested in China to apply the statutory compensation limit.

Eventually, the Wenzhou company was ordered to stop the infringement.

It received a compensation of 1 million 200 thousand yuan.

In the American sports shoes market, Adidas and Nike have a common enemy. It's not Under Armour, but Skech.

Rights protection has brought the natural enemies of Adidas and Nike to the same line.

Last year, Skech was so aggressive that his gross income amounted to 3 billion 150 million dollars.

In the first three months of this year, Skech's market share in the American sports shoes market was 5%, which surpassed Adidas's 4.6%, according to data from NPD group, a market research firm.

Stan Smith has always been the leader of Adidas classic series and is highly praised by the market.

But Cage has also launched a series of sneakers called Onix, which can easily be confused with Stan Smith from a distance.

This made Adidas unable to sit still, accusing Cage of his actions, which obviously had plagiarized and misled consumers. In the first trial of February this year, Adidas has won an initial victory, and the second instance will be held in May next year.

Stan Smith's old accounts have not yet been settled, and Adidas and Skech add new hatred.

The reason is that Cage launched a series of sneakers called Mega Blade, but this series is very similar to Adidas's Springblade in design.

Springblade's blade type cushioning structure has a high degree of identification, which has also led Adidas to court second times.

What's more, Cage's Burst sneakers are seen as a combination of Nike's Flyknit series and Adidas's Boost series.

In response, Nike filed a lawsuit against Skech earlier this year, accusing it of infringing eight patents.

Of course, Adidas has not focused its attention on sports brands. Some fashion brands have become the focus of Adidas's attention because of frequent sports edge ball.

Last year, a sports shirt launched by the famous clothing designer Marc Jacobs's clothing brand of the same name was eyed by Adidas. The reason is that the sweater used the design of "four bars" on the shoulders and sleeves.

In addition to the "three bars", Adidas also began to alert the "plagiarism" of the design of sports shoes.

In the past two years, Adidas and Kanye West have launched their cooperation.

The series began to be popular all over the world, and the infringement incidents also emerged one after another.

Media reports say that ADI will prosecute all the brands that plagiarize Yeezy Boosts, and the fast fashion brand Forever 21 has been Adidas's "key care". Adidas has strongly demanded that it stop producing and selling sports shoes similar to those of Yeezy Boost 750.

However, there are some differences between this infringement and trademark infringement, because copyright law does not protect the practical entities and only protects the trade appearance, which requires the registration of Federal Trade appearance.

In conclusion, such infringement cases are much more complicated than trademark infringement.

But who knows if Adidas is not drunk in this way? Anyway, the publicity effect has been achieved.

stay

In the tide of brand rights protection, Nike and Adidas at the top of Pyramid seem to be the ones who take the initiative to attack. Then, have they become defendants? The answer is yes, and it happens in the cases of mutual ripping between the two.

As early as 2006, Nike had accused Adidas of using Nike's unique SHOX technology in the production of sports shoes.

At that time, Garnett was still under Adidas's banner, and Adidas's signature shoes designed for Garnett were unlucky.

In those days, the technology of shock mitigation was at the peak of R & D, while the gap between Adidas and Nike in sports shoes market was not so large. The competition between the two was in the white hot stage, especially in the field of basketball shoes.

Ten years after this heart knot, Adidas finally got the chance to pull back to a city.

A few days ago, according to the Spanish media, the world sports daily, Adidas was prepared to sue Nike for the reason why Nike added seven dark streaks in Barcelona's home court uniform this season, which is highly similar to Adidas's patent.

In this regard, Nike and Barcelona have not responded, and patent agencies are discussing the case.

According to the analysis, if Adidas wins, Nike and Barcelona will face huge liability for compensation.

Some media think that the new season's jersey is salute to the 1992 jerseys design, but at that time, Barcelona's sponsors were not Nike, but the local brand Meyba.

Anyway, Adidas has taken the initiative to attack Nike.

Brand rights protection is a normal thing, but Adidas's active brands are rare.

Some analysts point out that this can also be regarded as a plan of two birds with one stone, and it can play the role of brand publicity in addition to safeguarding its own interests.

Right or speculation, perhaps no one to explore, but we still simply hope that any sports brand must have creative autonomy, this is the root of long-term development.