How could Nike’s stance against customization art by Drip Creationz create a negative effect?

Nike’s recent lawsuit against Drip Creationz has highlighted the potential cons of intellectual property enforcement by big name brands against third-party customization companies because:

  • Nike faces a potential negative impact for attempting to shut down the popular art of Drip Creationz;

  • Nike’s aggressive stance in pursuit of infringers can be seen as overbearing when other brands allow such customization art to exist; and

  • Nike’s enforcement can potentially be seen by consumers as a view toward stifling of creativity.

Read about brand protection and the issue with customization art.

Klemchuk LLP

This blog is published by Klemchuk LLP, a litigation, intellectual property, transactional, and international business law firm dedicated to protecting innovation. The firm provides tailored legal solutions to industries including software, technology, retail, real estate, consumer goods, ecommerce, telecommunications, restaurant, energy, media, and professional services.

The firm publishes Ideate, a blog discussing the latest news and insights into intellectual property law, business, and culture.

Previous
Previous

What did the Supreme Court define as limitations to the doctrine of Assignor Estoppel?

Next
Next

How can IP enforcement programs help companies with brand protection and counterfeiting issues?