Vapor
When news broke last week that Nike had secured a trademark for its iconic Air Jordan 1, a sneaker from 1985 that the brand regularly releases in retro form, it was viewed by many as a death knell for the wave of bootlegs borrowing the shoe’s silhouette. But a petition to the United States Patent and Trademark Office submitted on Sunday shows that designers seeking to make their own Jordan-esque sneakers are not necessarily going down without a fight.
In the filing, New York
City-based Robert Lopez accuses Nike of fraud, saying that it submitted
false statements to the USPTO and that its trademark for the Jordan 1
that was granted on June 1 was hence “improperly issued.” Lopez is the
founder of RGL Consulting Group, a firm that, per its website, has
“assisted independent brands and small business owners in successfully
enforcing their brand ownership rights against corporate giants.”
The
trademark Nike secured this month protects the overall composition of
the Air Jordan 1, along with the Air Jordan 1 Low and Air Jordan 1 Low
SE variations, under trade dress, which pertains specifically to the
physical appearance of a product. It arrives amid a trend of smaller
designers releasing their own versions of the Air Jordan 1 that
essentially copy the model but replace its Nike and Jordan Brand imagery
and wordmarks with new logos. Crucially, Nike’s new trademark can help
the company defend its intellectual property and go after similar shoes
even if they do not use its logos.
The trade dress for Nike’s
Dunk sneaker, a style similar to the Air Jordan 1, was pivotal in the
brand’s legal battle last year against independent designer Warren
Lotas, who sold Dunk lookalikes.
Source:www.complex.com
Author:Brendan Dunne
Editor:IPRdaily-Vapor