In June 2025, the ordinary court of the European Union ruled the adidas No. 12442166 "Three Stripes" trademark invalid. The Chinese Internet instantly fried the pot: "There will be no three stripes in the future?" "There will be no shamrock?" "Mountain fastness carnival?" with a reading of 150 million and a hot search for a week. Emotions overwhelm the facts. What exactly is the truth? We have dismantled the verdict, searched through evidence, and consulted experts to turn this' annual worst intellectual property case 'into a guide for avoiding pitfalls - it concerns Adidas, and more importantly, every brand that wants to turn' simple symbols' into 'golden signboards'.


1、 The term 'invalid' in hot searches ≠ comprehensive removal
1. Only one trademark has been declared invalid
Case number T-631/22 of the General Court of the European Union (EUGC), the subject matter of which is a three stripe trademark registered in 2014 under number 12442166 (designating Class 25 for clothing, shoes, and hats). Adidas still has nearly 200 valid "three stripe" family trademarks in the European Union: different widths, colors, tilt angles, product categories... all of which are safe and sound.


2. Regional principle: What does the EU judge about China, the United States, and Japan?
Trademark rights are a 'sovereign small grid', and EU judgments only take effect in EU member states. Adidas' three bar registrations in core markets such as Germany, the United States, China, and Japan are still valid, and the global rights protection ammunition depot is still full.


3. Validity of judgment: Invalid ≠ Public
The invalidation of Trademark No. 12442166 only means that Adidas cannot claim exclusive rights to the trademark "this one" in the 27 EU countries, but——
① Other valid registered trademarks can still be cited;
② Can advocate against unfair competition (passing off);
③ Multiple rights can be protected through copyright, design patents, and product decoration.
Conclusion: Do knockoffs want to copy at "zero cost"? The legal risk remains high enough to explode.


2、 Why doesn't the court even recognize the '70 year old face'?
1. Significant two-step approach: intrinsic significance+acquired significance
Article 7 (1) (b) of the EU Trademark Regulation: Marks lacking distinctiveness shall not be registered. Adidas also acknowledges that the three stripes themselves have weak descriptive power, so they focused all their efforts on "gaining significance through extensive use" and submitted 12000 pages of evidence: sales invoices, advertising bills, global research, social media data


2. The court "picks words": the trademark design is too simple, and once it is changed, it is no longer what it is
Three parallel and equidistant stripes of equal width can be applied to a product in any orientation
Adidas understands that the length, angle, and color scheme are variable, as long as consumers can still recognize the "three bars".
The court understands that the text does not include "variable length" or "tiltable", therefore——
① Reverse color matching (white background and black stripes) → not a trademark involved in the case;
② Tilt 45 ° → not a trademark involved in the case;
③ Bold stripes → Not a trademark involved in the case.
Out of 12000 pages, 90% of the usage was "removed" by the court, and the remaining less than a thousand pages were found to have only conducted research in five countries, which did not cover the "entire European Union". Therefore, "obtaining significance" was rejected by one vote.


3. Inspiration for Chinese Enterprises
-Application stage: The simpler the graphics, the more "transformation space" should be left in the registration documents - all foreseeable proportions, angles, and color combinations should be written into the trademark description, or simply registered as a series of trademarks.
-Evidence stage: The "granularity" of daily traces should be fine - invoices, advertisements, social media topics, KOL placements, offline store photos, labeled by time, region, and product category. The court requires "whole chain evidence" to be easily exported with just one click.
-Research stage: In order to turn the tide by "obtaining significance", the market report must cover all member countries (or all provincial-level administrative regions in China), with no shortage of sample size, questionnaire design, control group, and statistical significance.


3、 Will Adidas lose? No, it's "bleeding back"
1. Start Plan B immediately
48 hours after the verdict, Adidas has submitted three new applications to the European Intellectual Property Office, strictly following the proportions and color schemes recognized by the court, and using evidence to re cut "compliant samples". Once approved, it can block counterfeit products of the same style.


2. Synchronized contraction of the global front
In China, Adidas has added 17 new "three stripes+Chinese" and "three stripes+clover" combination trademarks in the first half of 2025, upgrading "simple symbols" to "composite symbols" to reduce the probability of being challenged by "distinctiveness".


3. Business model upgrade
Stripes are no longer exclusive to me, but 'Stripes+BOOST', 'Stripes+Clover', and 'Stripes+Sustainable Materials' can be exclusive to me. ”Adidas links its trademark strategy with product iteration, using technology, design, and ESG stories to extend the lifespan of "old symbols".


4、 Three bars fall, who should laugh secretly? ——Three compulsory courses for Chinese brands
1. Symbol minimalism ≠ Protecting minimalism
Huawei, Li Ning, and ANTA all want to be super symbols that can be remembered at a glance, but the simpler they are, the easier it is to be identified as lacking significance. When registering, it is essential to:
-Multiple proposal submissions: black and white+color, horizontal+vertical, flat+three-dimensional, forming a "trademark pool";
-Advance layout to obtain significant evidence: synchronize sales, exposure, and research data on the day of new product release.


2. Single region ≠ Global market
Overseas brands often suffer from the problem of "having peace of mind with domestic registration". The European Union, the United States, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America have significant differences in the scale of "significance":
-EU: Extremely strict on "stripes", "grids", and "numbers";
-The United States: accepts' intent to use ', but the objection process is fierce;
-Middle East: Religious and cultural sensitivity, with more subjective scrutiny of graphic elements.
The fear of 'one country being invalidated' is not terrible, but the fear is' chain invalidity '- many agreements allow the other country to cite EU judgments as a reference. Before going abroad, conduct an "international medical examination" for the core trademark.


3. Trademark ≠ Brand All
Adidas' true moat is not three bars, but "three bars+sports technology+event resources+community culture". Chinese brands also need to upgrade their intellectual property strategies to the dimension of "brand assets":
-Six in one: technology patents, design patents, copyrights, data, domain names, short video accounts, and private domain communities;
-Establish a "brand monitoring tower": global customs filing, e-commerce crawlers, 24-hour warning for social media keywords, freeze accounts first and then file lawsuits and claims for infringement, turning the cost of rights protection into a profit center.


5、 At the end: Don't treat 'intellectual property' as' news'
The Adidas case is like a mirror, reflecting three different faces:
-Media: Creating anxiety with 'complete failure';
-Netizens: Carnival in the emotion of "the three bars are about to disappear";
-Enterprise: Deploy troops in the "salient" technical details.


Intellectual property has never been a "cool article" on hot searches, but a "granular game" hidden in registration instructions, invoice headers, research questionnaires, and court rulings. The pit Adidas stepped into today may be the tuition fee paid by another Chinese overseas brand tomorrow. Leave emotions in the comments section and rationality on the desk - in symbol wars, only by taking "simplicity" to the extreme and "details" to the point of suffocation can "even a barrier" become an insurmountable moat.