Three Stripes, Four Stripes: Adidas v. White Fox and Brand Identity in Australia

Adidas is challenging White Fox’s four-stripe clothing in Australia. What the dispute means for fashion brands, design clearance, and advertising.

The Case

Adidas has sued Australian fashion label White Fox Boutique in the Federal Court of Australia, alleging that clothing featuring four parallel stripes infringes Adidas’ three-stripe trademarks. The allegations also concern promotional images pairing White Fox clothing with Adidas footwear.

White Fox is defending the claim. At an October 2026 court appearance, White Fox argued that the stripes were decorative rather than used as a trademark, pointing to striped clothing sold by other retailers. The dispute remains contested, with hearings expected in 2027.

Why it matters

The familiar sportswear stripe has moved comfortably into everyday fashion. The familiarity creates a question for designers: when does a detail read as decoration, and when does it signal a particular brand?

Under Section 120 of Australia’s Trade Marks Act, infringement can arise from using a substantially identical or deceptively similar sign as a trademark for goods covered by a registration. The fact that White Fox uses an extra stripe does not, by itself, resolve the comparison, nor does White Fox’s claim that its stripes are decorative. Whether the design is being used as a trademark is also a substantive issue.

What it means for brands and companies

At Minx Law, we advise companies to take the following steps to mitigate risk and ensure that non-decorative, source-identifying features are legally protectable:

1.   Review recognizable design features before production, including their placement and the impression created by the finished garment.

2.   Review the campaign alongside the product. Footwear and styling decisions, along with overall aesthetic and “vibe” choices, may encourage an association that the product team did not intend. The Adidas allegations are a reminder to include the final photographs in that review, rather than stopping at the technical drawing.

3.   For companies selling into Australia, assess local trademark rights and the proposed use in that market. A design decision made for a U.S. launch should not become the default approval for every country where the product will be sold.

MEET THE AUTHOR

Meet Charlene Minx, Founder & Principal

Charlene Minx is an intellectual property attorney, and the founder and principal of Minx Law. Drawing on 20 years of experience, Charlene partners with founders and senior executives to develop and execute intellectual property strategies that support and advance long-term business objectives.

THOUGHT LEADERSHIP

Articles by Charlene Minx.

IP updates & insight
delivered straight to your inbox.

Join the Minx Law Monthly Newsletter and receive insights from the Minx Law Team delivered to your inbox.

START A CONVERSATION

Your intellectual property should work as hard as you do.