adidas fights for new trial in legal battle against Thom Browne

Earlier this year, the verdict of an eight-member jury in Manhattan’s Southern District Court found that the U.S. luxury fashion designer was not liable for damages or profits from the sale of products with four stripes or its trademarked grosgrain ribbon.

At the time, adidas America and adidas AG were seeking damages of US$867,225, claiming that was the amount they would have obtained from Thom Browne as licensing fees if the two brands had collaborated, and US$7,011,961 million in profits they claimed the U.S. designer had earned from the sale of striped apparel and footwear.

Now, several months later, the German sportswear company has appealed the decision, claiming that Judge Jed Rakoff provided erroneous instructions to the jury regarding point-of-sale confusion, and is requesting a new trial. According to adidas, confusion “is not limited to the time of purchase, but can also occur during the ‘initial interest’ or ‘post-sale’ phase.” It further argues that the judge wrongly excluded crucial testimony from one of its experts.

Last week, Thom Browne’s attorney responded by contradicting this position. He argued that the jury was not influenced by the instructions and that the expert witness in question did not credibly prejudice adidas. The American designer urged the court to reject adidas’ attempt to reexamine the case. In his response, Thom Browne asserted that “adidas’ arguments are full of omissions and misrepresentations.” In his view, the jury was “clearly instructed on the nature of adidas’ allegations.” And he noted that the jury was fully aware that it would only consider initial and post-sale confusion, rather than confusion at the point of purchase, as adidas contended.

In other news, SHEIN and Forever 21 team up to power fast fashion.