Adidas Sues White Fox Over Four-Stripe Design in Federal Court

Adidas has asked Australia's Federal Court to hand over White Fox's profits on a line of four-striped garments, arguing the Sydney fast-fashion label's designs are "deceptively similar" to the German sportswear giant's three-stripe trademark.

The lawsuit, filed Friday before Justice Ian Jackman, accuses White Fox of selling and advertising clothes with what Adidas calls the "intention to trade off our reputation." Adidas wants the Australian company's profits, plus interest and costs, from the disputed products.

The size gap explains why a global giant is spending legal capital on a privately held Australian startup. Adidas reported €24.8 billion (£21bn; $28bn) in 2025 revenue. White Fox, by contrast, booked AU$542m (£286m; $377m) in the 12 months to June 2025—a four-fold jump from AU$121m in 2022, according to the Australian Financial Review.

What triggered the lawsuit?

Adidas first told White Fox to pull the four-striped stock in March 2025, according to its statement of claim. White Fox kept selling through bus-stop billboards, bus wraps and a stable of university-aged influencers. So Adidas moved to court.

In the filings, Adidas points to specific items: sweatpants, lounge shorts and White Fox-branded socks modeled by someone wearing pink Adidas shoes. Adidas alleges a June 2025 online listing was edited days after the proceedings were lodged to remove one of the three stripes from the shoes, then all three a week later.

"White Fox is drawing an association in the minds of consumers of the two brands," Adidas argues in its court papers, "or at least sailing close to the wind." Adidas also claims the ads create the impression it has approved or sponsored the White Fox line.

How does White Fox plan to fight back?

White Fox has not yet filed a formal defence. Its lawyers told the court Friday that the company will point to other prominent Australian brands—Cotton On, Sportscraft, Glassons—that sell garments with "similar decorative stripes." White Fox denies any trademark breach.

A three-to-four-day trial is set for early next year.

Adidas holds an Australian trademark on its three-stripe mark dating to 1957, giving it decades of legal runway. It has used that runway before: in 2013, it won a similar case against Pacific Brands over four-striped shoes sold in Australia. The win set the template Adidas is now applying to White Fox.

What does this change for fast-fashion operators?

What does this change for an Australian or UK label running stripe-heavy designs? The answer is blunt: the three-stripe mark is older than most of them, and Adidas has shown it will litigate, not just send cease-and-desist letters.

For White Fox specifically, a damages order tied to its full profit on the disputed SKUs could dent a brand that quadrupled in three years. For the broader fast-fashion set, the message is that bus-stop and influencer marketing of copycat stripes now carries a courtroom risk.

Who runs White Fox?

White Fox launched in 2013 and is privately owned by founders Georgia and Daniel Contos, a Greek-Australian couple, and Daniel's mother Melina Maceri. The company built a teen-and-twenties customer base across Australia, the UK and the US. It entered the UK in 2024 and leans heavily on influencer marketing through university-aged creators. The brand's profile—teen-driven, social-native, fast-turning inventory—makes it precisely the kind of target Adidas has built a trademark team to police.

The case carries weight beyond White Fox. Adidas's three-stripe mark is one of the most-litigated logos in sportswear, and the Federal Court's ruling will reset the ceiling for what Australian fast-fashion peers can copy without a fight.