Nike Forced to Manufacture Signature adidas Design Element

[ConcreteCharlie]

so are you gonna make a huge stink about every team with 3 stripes since 1949?

[ForwardProgress]

Perhaps the Patriots like it and told Nike to go pound sand?

LOL!

The simplest theory is most often the correct one.

I think that's a simpler way of saying what I said.. A triple stripe design is nothing new and nothing exclusive to Adidas.. The fact that they embrace it and have worked it into various designs is irrelevant.. I never considered the patriots socks to be Adidas-inspired.. I just saw a pair of socks with a monochrome striping pattern.. Adidas may have designed it, but the patriots like it and kept it when Nike took over.. Simple as that

Three stripes are indeed exclusive to adidas: they registered them as their trademark in 1949.

The very first time I saw the Patriots triple stripe away socks in 2000 I said to myself, "Those look like adidas soccer socks." And then when I saw that adidas designed and manufactured the uniforms it was no surprise why their socks looked that way. adidas is much more known for soccer gear worldwide and have been in the athletic shoe and apparel business since before World War II. They are a well established company and three stripes on athletic footwear and clothing is synonymous with their brand. It's not just a design element; it's a registered trademark differentiating their brand from other brands of similar product.

[ForwardProgress]

so are you gonna make a huge stink about every team with 3 stripes since 1949?

No, but adidas has a right to.

[ConcreteCharlie]

so my hypothetical company can register headspoon piping as their trademark, and from that point on, only my company can make uniforms with headspoon piping? Thats the logic you're using

[ForwardProgress]

so my hypothetical company can register headspoon piping as their trademark, and from that point on, only my company can make uniforms with headspoon piping? Thats the logic you're using

Yes, because that's the whole purpose of registering a trademark and that's the logic adidas' lawyers use in court when defending the three stripe trademark.

Hell, adidas sued a company because they were using TWO stripes on their products, and you know what? Adidas won!

What design elements are considered registerable as trademarks is up to trademark lawyers and the people who work in the trademark office to decide. Anyone who owns a business can apply to register a trademark but that doesn't mean the trademark office will approve the registration.

A good rule of thumb to ask yourself before applying is, does my design element or logo consist of only simple geometric shapes? If it does, than you probably won't be able to register it as a trademark. If your design element or logo is unique in both design and how/where it is applied to your product, than you probably will be able to register it as a trademark.

adidas was able to trademark the three stripes because in the late 1940's no other company had put three stripes on footwear, shirts, shorts, and pants in the areas that they did and in the way they did, making it a unique design element and therefore an identifier of their brand.

The problem with your headspoon piping is, headspoon piping has appeared on baseball jerseys for decades and is now considered a generic design element of baseball jerseys. I don't know if someone can register it as a design element now after all these years of it being used. It is probably now considered public domain, but the very first designer who added it to his baseball jerseys sure as hell could have registered it as a trademark of his brand of baseball jerseys if the trademark office deemed it a unique and identifying design element. It sure as hell isn't now though.

[ConcreteCharlie]

thats preposterous

[ColeJ]

i consider 3 stripes on socks to be fairly ubiquitous and generic as well, though...

sort of how chuck taylors are the "generic" looking tennis shoes you'd see in a random cartoon, without actually being related to converse at all.

[WavePunter]

Firstly, Adidas has not been producing footwear and apparel since before WWII, considering Adidas didn't exist until 1949, and never registered a single trademark until 1954.. But with that said, Adidas attempted to sue the NCAA for antitrust reasons, and they did not win that one. In fact, Adidas complied with the NCAA and the two entities sat down to devise a set of guidelines regarding what shall be considered Adidas branding and what shall be considered nothing more than a design element used for embellishment.. This set of guidelines can be read here:

http://www.smcgaels.com/fls/21400/pdf/Compliance_Forms/July_2012_Newsletter.pdf?&DB_OEM_ID=21400

So, it's really not as cut and dry as you make it seem.. The legal system has recognized Adidas's unfair attempt to secure a monopoly on striping, and has ruled against Adidas in clear cases of "decoration" multiple times.

I certainly see the connection between the patriots triple striped socks and Adidas's branding, but I truly never drew a connection of my own until reading the original post of this thread - which I think illustrates the perception of a triple stripe pattern as a universally accepted traditional design element unrelated to Adidas.. Also, Adidas has publicly stated that various forms of triple stripes on Adidas apparel are actually decorative embellishments, and NOT brand-related, so it's entirely possible that they included a "design element" into one of their designs that certainly reinforces their brand, but doesn't necessarily promote their brand.. Then, once the uniform design became the property and identity of the patriots (and especially after changing suppliers), it simply became nothing more than a decorative sock design..

I definitely agree with you that Adidas may very well have intentionally shoehorned a subtle "adidas" signature into that uniform with the road socks, but they did so VERY conservatively, and in a traditional enough and subtle enough way, that it appears and acts as much like a design element as a branding element.. They walk a tightrope with the "three stripes" motif (intentionally I think), which creates a very blurry line, because they change their story based on their situation.. They use very few descriptors in their trademarks, which leaves room for a broad interpretation, and thus, creates problems for the courts who are trying to make a ruling (they initially lost the battle with the two-stripe company locally, then took it to the national court and finally the European court to win), so nothing here is clear-cut.. But the general trend is to highlight a few key points that include: similarity of the two marks, public confusion between the two marks, and public generally drawing a connection to the established mark when viewing the infringing mark, application of the mark, location of the mark, etc.. These factors are all considered in these cases, and this case is no different.. You and I could disagree completely on this issue, and we could still both make very strong arguments to support our opinion here, and we could argue for days - both being completely right with everything we say, and the ultimate decision could come down to who the judge was that day and his personal opinion on the matter.. It's a blurry line, and Adidas uses that to their advantage, but my personal opinion is that traditional design elements, when used in traditional design application, are fair game, and in the case of the patriots socks, I don't think Adidas or Nike have much room to cause a fuss over it.

[Pizzaman7294]

Hey guys...here's the real reason....it matches the old sock stripes...case closed.

[Rimbaud82]

so my hypothetical company can register headspoon piping as their trademark, and from that point on, only my company can make uniforms with headspoon piping? Thats the logic you're using

Hell, adidas sued a company because they were using TWO stripes on their products, and you know what? Adidas won!

adidas was able to trademark the three stripes because in the late 1940's no other company had put three stripes on footwear, shirts, shorts, and pants in the areas that they did and in the way they did, making it a unique design element and therefore an identifier of their brand.

Fun fact, O'Neills still uses three stripes on their jerseys and products (tracksuits etc.). They beat Adidas in court too:

[Tracy MidGrady]

Its just socks man

[pcgd]

Adidas 3 stripes aren't as much about 3 stripes as the usage of the stripes. The reason they can go after companies that use 2 or 4 stripes is because those companies clearly are using them in the same way adidas has done for decades in an effort to confuse the customer or at least sell product that appears to be adidas product. Its very case by case, as I think you'll find 2 stripe track suits without any issue, but you won't find 4 stripe shoes at Payless, and K-Swiss is just fine with 5 stripes. So its very case by case.

The O'Neill thing only applies to Ireland. O'Neill also sells "international" versions of their kits because adidas has the trademark across most of the rest of the world.

Another fun fact, adidas actually bought the 3 stripes trademark from a Finnish sportswear company in 1951.

[BBTV]

ForwardProgress is a poster to watch in 2016.

[Sport]

I find their overuse of the stripes in soccer to be intrusive and annoying, but other sports have resisted. There were a few adidas teams in the NFL in the late 90's before the NFL went to a single supplier and none used the 3 stripes except this one part of New England's unis. Did adidas put the three stripes on the Patriots' road socks on purpose? Probably. Or it could've been a coincidence because they matched the Pats use of 3 stripes from their throwbacks. White socks in the NFL need to have stripes so they had to have something and stripes that matched the side panels would've looked better so it's likely that the three stripes were a product placement that adidas was able to slip by the Patriots and NFL. It's not as cut and dry as you think.

Why Nike and Reebok haven't cared to update those socks to removed adidas' "trademark" is probably because they either don't care with their actual logos appearing on both shoulders, all sideline apparel, wristbands etc etc. Or the Patriots have asked them to continue making the socks that way because they've had so much success in that uniform as is. Remember, the Patriots are also one of the few teams who told Nike to go love themselves with their toilet seat collars. It's not crazy to believe the Patriots told Reebok and Nike not to touch their uniforms (save the matte gray pants from Nike).

[WSU151]

Why were the 49ers allowed to wear three stripes if adidas trademarked the stripes in 1949? That's kind of where your argument falls apart, unless adidas sued the team every year since 1950, when the 49ers added the three "trademarked" stripes.

Hey guys...here's the real reason....it matches the old sock stripes...case closed.

I'm surprised adidas didn't sue the Patriots for using those socks...because it's a clear violation on the trademark..lolz...

Anyway, the reason Nike hasn't changed the socks is because the casual fan doesn't look at the Patriots away uniform and says "Oh, man, I didn't know the Patriots wore adidas socks!! That's SICK! I'm gonna go buy 18 pairs of adidas socks and a whole bunch more adidas stuff right now." In fact, 99.999 percent of football fans probably don't even notice, and if they do notice, they probably don't care a whole lot. Three stripes in football is somewhat common. Football socks are not big sellers on the NFL store.

[Rambulance]

Because Reebok(and Nike) work for the teams(league), not the other way around.

[RyanB06]

To paraphrase Sigmund Freud: Sometimes sock stripes are just sock stripes.

[ForwardProgress]

i consider 3 stripes on socks to be fairly ubiquitous and generic as well, though...

sort of how chuck taylors are the "generic" looking tennis shoes you'd see in a random cartoon, without actually being related to converse at all.

Do you live in the 70's?

Yeah, three stripes on socks were ubiquitous and generic in the 70's when everyone was wearing striped knee socks (athletes AND everyday people on the street), but nobody wearss socks like the ones in your picture now. And the Patriots are actually the only football team, pro or college, I can think of that wears *three same color stripes of equal thickness* at the *tops* of their socks. That's why the socks scream "adidas" to me: not only because they were designed and manufactured by adidas the first year they debuted, but also because the stripes look EXACTLY like adidas stripes: the thickness, the area of placement at the tops of the socks.... overall they look exactly like adidas soccer socks.

To further this point, name another athletic apparel brand that puts three stripes at the top of their soccer socks. There aren't any, because they know adidas would sue the hell out of them. If Nike released a line of soccer socks with three stripes at the top because they, like you, consider three stripes on socks to be generic, how do you think adidas would react? They'd sue the hell out of Nike for trademark infringement, that's how they'd react!

adidas has probably been laughing their butts off ever since 2012 when Nike took over the NFL uniform contract: "We put our three stripe trademark on the Patriots away socks as an extra way to show off our brand and first Reebok had to keep making them, and now Nike has to keep making them! Free advertising for adidas! LOLZ!!!!"

The funny thing about this is, adidas putting their three stripes on the Pats' away socks is the only time I can think of adidas putting their trademarked design element on a football uniform. Can anyone think of any college football teams that adidas made the uniforms of in the 90's? Do you remember if any of these teams' uniforms suddenly had three stripes in areas where they never did before? That would be an interesting research project, to see if the Patriots' road socks are indeed the first time adidas has ever put their three stripe trademark on an American football uniform.

They've been doing it for decades on soccer uniforms: three stripes down the shoulders and sleeves of the jersey, down the sides of the shorts, and at the tops of the socks. You can be in the nosebleed seats and still know adidas made the uniforms. Nike, Reebok, Puma, Under Armour... nobody else has anything like the three stripe trademark and that's why adidas protects it so aggressively.

[ForwardProgress]

Firstly, Adidas has not been producing footwear and apparel since before WWII, considering Adidas didn't exist until 1949...

adidas manufactured the boots for Hitler's army during World War II.

[ForwardProgress]

Hey guys...here's the real reason....it matches the old sock stripes...case closed.

Throwbacks are very poor evidence of what old uniforms actually looked like when they were originally worn.