According to a Guardian report, Adidas initially took a stand against the grassroots Black Lives Matter movement. However, following public criticism, the company withdrew its objections after just a few days.
The subject of the dispute is three stripes that are used in both the brand giant's logo and the movement's logo. Adidas argues that the logo is too similar to the movement's. Is there really a risk of confusion? And how does it happen that global corporations come into conflict with civil society movements?
Branding, the labelling of products, services, or intangible goods, has a long tradition. Even in ancient times, artisans marked their wares to make them recognisable.
Branding emerged as an independent discipline at the beginning of the 20th century with the rise of consumer culture. Since then, companies have used it to differentiate themselves from the competition and specifically address their target groups.
Today, branding shapes not only companies but also individuals and projects. Social media offers a variety of ways to make yourself or your products visible. Whether influencers or small producers, logos, photos, and texts help attract attention and create a positive perception.
Civil society initiatives also compete for attention and use similar communication channels as companies. A "brand" in the colloquial sense often emerges simply through repeated use, regardless of a formal trademark registration.
From a legal perspective, however, a trademark must be a sign that distinguishes a company's goods or services from others. While political movements are not traditional market participants, branding still plays a vital role for them, both externally and within the movement.
Branding promotes identification with an idea, conveys clear and concise messages, and strengthens the activists' sense of community. A well-thought-out logo, a catchy slogan, or consistent visual design makes it easier for supporters to spread information about the movement on social media and other channels.
Research into the rights to word and figurative trademarks is essential, even though many civil society projects are not initially commercial enterprises and lack a formal legal status. In this way, branding contributes to sustainably increasing the visibility and impact of social initiatives.
The "BLACK LIVES MATTER" trademark is already registered as a word mark in the US, but not yet as a figurative mark.
The Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation now seeks registration of the depicted figurative mark, including for the "clothing" category. The goal was to prevent third parties from using the logo for merchandise and monetising it. Adidas, known for its three stripes in the "clothing" category, saw this as a potential threat.
In fact, the likelihood of confusion in a direct comparison is low. However, with well-known brands, it's not just the actual confusion that matters. Adidas also justified its objection with the risk of "dilution" of its own brand. Case law assumes that consumers often have only vague brand images in their memory. Even a mere association can therefore be problematic.
Following public criticism, Adidas withdrew the objection a few days later. Regardless, it would have been unlikely that the U.S. Trademark Office would have refused to register the BLM Foundation's figurative mark due to the opposition. The dominance of the word mark and the apparent visual differences speak against it. Nevertheless, Adidas—like many other fashion brands—consistently takes action against competitors who come too close to its signature three stripes. The company has achieved varying degrees of success in this. In 2016, for example, Adidas was able to prevent the registration of a shape mark based on its own shoe design with three stripes.
