Adidas has filed a Federal Court lawsuit against Australian fast-fashion retailer White Fox, claiming the company is selling and promoting clothing with a four-striped design that is "deceptively similar" to the German sportswear giant's iconic trademark. The case was filed on 21 September 2026 and updated on 1 October, according to court documents. Adidas claims it has repeatedly requested that White Fox cease selling and advertising the disputed garments since March, but the Sydney-based company has refused.
White Fox, a fast-fashion online retailer popular with teenagers and young adults across Australia, the UK and the US, has built its brand presence through billboards, bus advertising and partnerships with university-aged influencers. During Friday's Federal Court hearing, White Fox's legal team denied any trademark breach, though the company has not yet filed a formal defence.
What is White Fox's defence?
White Fox's lawyers told Justice Ian Jackman that the firm intends to argue that other prominent Australian brands—including Cotton On, Sportscraft and Glassons—also sell clothing featuring "similar decorative stripes". This argument suggests that four-stripe designs are not unique to Adidas and are used across the broader fashion industry.
What are Adidas's core claims?
In its written statement of claim, Adidas asserts that its three-striped design carries a "substantial and valuable reputation" in Australia, where it has been trademarked since 1957. The company alleges that since at least March, White Fox has been selling and advertising garments with four parallel stripes of equal width, which it contends infringes Adidas's trademark rights. Adidas argues that White Fox's designs are "substantially identical with or otherwise deceptively similar" to its own.
Lawyers for Adidas told the court that White Fox, through advertising and selling clothes with four stripes, had the "intention to trade off our reputation". The company further claims that White Fox's promotional materials for its four-striped clothing and branded socks feature people wearing genuine Adidas items, potentially leading Australian consumers to believe Adidas is associated with White Fox or has approved the design.
Adidas contends that White Fox is "drawing an association in the minds of consumers" between the two brands, or at least "sailing close to the wind". The company is seeking orders to stop White Fox selling the disputed products, as well as damages or an account of profits, interest and legal costs.
What evidence has Adidas presented?
Adidas has submitted side-by-side comparisons of its products with White Fox clothing, including sweatpants and lounge shorts, alongside images of billboards displayed on buses and at bus stops. In one instance from June 2025, Adidas identified an online listing showing White Fox-branded socks being modelled by a person wearing pink Adidas shoes. According to court documents, a few days after the legal proceedings were lodged last month, the Adidas logo on the shoes was digitally altered to remove one stripe, and a week later, all three stripes were removed from the image. Adidas alleges that some promotional images digitally obscured branding on Adidas footwear worn alongside White Fox clothing, though these remain allegations and not findings by the court.
How does this compare to previous trademark cases?
Adidas has a mixed track record in stripe-related trademark disputes. In 2013, the company successfully sued Pacific Brands in Australia for selling shoes with four stripes. However, that case illustrated that outcomes can depend on the stripes' placement and overall presentation—the Federal Court found some four-stripe shoe designs infringed Adidas's rights while others did not. More recently, Adidas lost its 2023 US case against designer Thom Browne over four-stripe designs, suggesting that courts do not always find such designs infringe Adidas's trademark.
Who is White Fox and what is its financial scale?
White Fox was launched in 2013 by Georgia and Daniel Contos and remains privately owned by the Greek-Australian couple and Daniel's mother Melina Maceri. The company has expanded significantly, establishing a growing presence in the US and entering the UK market in 2024. In the 12 months to June 2025, White Fox generated AU$542 million (£286 million; $377 million) in revenue, representing a four-fold increase from its 2022 figure of AU$121 million, according to the Australian Financial Review.
By comparison, Adidas reported €24.8 billion (£21 billion; $28 billion) in revenue in 2025, making the German company substantially larger. Adidas is also seeking damages from White Fox, including the profit from the disputed products plus interest and costs.
What happens next?
A three to four-day trial is expected to take place early next year. The first case-management hearing was scheduled for 9 October 2026 before Justice Ian Jackman; that hearing concerns management of the proceedings rather than a final ruling on infringement.
Key Facts
- Adidas claims White Fox's four-striped clothing design infringes its three-stripe trademark, registered in Australia since 1957
- White Fox argues that other major Australian fashion brands also use similar decorative stripes on their products
- Adidas alleges White Fox digitally altered promotional images to remove Adidas branding after legal proceedings were filed
- A trial is scheduled for early 2027, with a case-management hearing held on 9 October 2026
- White Fox generated AU$542 million in revenue in the 12 months to June 2025, up from AU$121 million in 2022
