The sportswear giant says adding a stripe doesn’t make a design original. The case puts one of Gen Z’s most visible fashion brands in federal court in Australia.
By the Social Storytellers Collective News Desk
Adidas has taken White Fox Boutique to Australia’s Federal Court, arguing that the Sydney label’s four-stripe clothing is close enough to its famous three stripes to mislead shoppers. In filings first lodged in September and updated last week, Adidas says the White Fox pieces are substantially identical or deceptively similar to its trademarked designs, and that White Fox kept selling them after being asked to stop in March. Adidas wants the sales halted, a court declaration that the law was broken, and White Fox’s profits on the products plus damages and costs. White Fox’s lawyers at Gilbert and Tobin declined to comment on a matter before the court. The first case management hearing was set before Justice Ian Jackman, brother of actor Hugh Jackman.
How Adidas Built Its Case
Adidas says its representatives went shopping to make the argument. The day after its March request, someone working for the company bought a pair of plum lounge shorts with white stripes, and between May and July they collected a dozen more four-stripe items. They also photographed White Fox ads on Sydney buses and bus shelters from April to June, a hard thing to miss given how heavily the brand advertises across Sydney, London and Los Angeles. Adidas goes further, claiming White Fox styled models in its socks and pants alongside genuine three-stripe Adidas sneakers, then digitally edited a stripe out of some photos. The company argues all of this creates the impression that Adidas made or approved the clothes, or at the very least that White Fox was “sailing close to the wind.” White Fox’s social accounts show the four-stripe pieces arrived in January.
A Big Brand Against a Fast-Growing One
This is not a scrappy startup under attack. White Fox, founded in 2013 by Sydney couple Georgia and Daniel Contos and co-owned with Daniel’s mother, Melina Maceri, reported A$542 million in revenue across Australia and the U.S. in the year to June 2025, and spent A$52 million on marketing. Its bubble-font hoodies and sweats are a staple for teenagers and young adults in both countries. Adidas has a strong home-court record here, having beaten Pacific Brands in 2013 over four-striped Dunlop and Grosby shoes, though it lost some U.K. protections in a 2025 appeal involving Thom Browne and has been refused broad stripe trademarks in the European Union.
The case lands as Australian brands fight copying from every direction. Levi’s is suing surf label Globe over pocket tabs it calls blatant copying, and Sydney label Lonely Kids Club says thousands of its T-shirt designs have been lifted and sold on Temu. Whether a fourth stripe is enough to make a look your own is now a question for a judge, and the answer will matter to every brand trying to borrow from an icon without paying for it.
Source: Luca Ittimani, “Adidas sues Australian label White Fox over ‘deceptively similar’ four-stripe clothing,” The Guardian, Oct. 6, 2026.