New Balance Sues Decathlon Over Logo It Says Looks Too Much Like Its Iconic ‘N’
New Balance has spent decades making a single letter, ‘N,’ synonymous with its shoes.
Now the Boston-based footwear company says one of the world’s largest sporting goods retailers is getting a little too close to that famous mark.
New Balance has filed a trademark lawsuit against Decathlon over a logo appearing on shoes sold under Decathlon’s Kiprun running brand. Decathlon says the design is a stylized ‘K.’ New Balance says consumers are seeing something very different: its ‘N.’
And according to New Balance, it has the social media posts to prove it.
The lawsuit alleges that Decathlon’s design is “virtually identical” and confusingly similar to New Balance’s longstanding ‘N’ trademark.
New Balance claims it has used the letter ‘N’ on footwear since the 1970s and has spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting its trademarks and building recognition around the logo. New Balance’s longstanding use of ‘N’ marks on footwear is also reflected in prior court proceedings involving the company.
At the center of the new dispute is Kiprun, Decathlon’s running brand.
New Balance claims the stylized mark appearing prominently on the side of certain Kiprun shoes looks so much like its ‘N’ that consumers could mistakenly believe the shoes were made by, affiliated with, or endorsed by New Balance.
According to the complaint, New Balance contacted Decathlon and asked the company to revise the design. Decathlon refused, maintaining that the logo represents the letter ‘K,’ not an ‘N.’
New Balance calls that explanation “half true at best.”
New Balance Says It Has Evidence Consumers Are Confused
Perhaps the most interesting part of New Balance’s case is the evidence it says comes directly from consumers.
The complaint includes examples of social media users who encountered the Kiprun shoes and apparently saw New Balance’s familiar ‘N,’ rather than Decathlon’s intended ‘K.’ Some questioned whether the shoes were New Balance products.
That evidence could become important because the central question in a trademark infringement case generally isn’t whether two logos are technically identical. It is whether their use is likely to cause confusion amongst consumers.
New Balance also argues that the dispute goes beyond the logo itself.
According to the complaint, certain Decathlon shoes bearing the challenged design share an overall appearance with New Balance footwear, which New Balance contends further increases the possibility that consumers could mistake the source of the shoes.
New Balance is asking the court for substantial relief, including an order stopping Decathlon from selling products bearing the challenged design and requiring the recall of allegedly infringing products. The company is also seeking damages and attorneys’ fees.
Does New Balance Have a Strong Case?
If this lawsuit reaches a jury, the case would be decided on one central question:
Could consumers see Decathlon’s shoe and reasonably believe it is a New Balance shoe?
At this point, New Balance appears to have assembled some compelling initial evidence on that question.
The social media posts included in the complaint are particularly important.
In many trademark cases, lawyers spend enormous amounts of time and money trying to establish that consumers could be confused. Here, New Balance says it has found consumers effectively documenting that confusion themselves, seeing the Kiprun shoe, identifying the logo as an ‘N,’ and questioning whether the product is associated with New Balance.
That can be powerful evidence at trial.
The visuals also present a challenge for Decathlon.
Decathlon may intend the logo to be a ‘K,’ but consumers don’t necessarily know what a designer intended. They see the mark as it actually appears on the shoe.
And when the design is placed prominently on the side of an athletic shoe (exactly where consumers have seen New Balance place its ‘N’ for decades), the similarity becomes particularly apparent. In some uses, including where the design is reversed, the mark looks even more like an ‘N.’
Therefore, if this case were ultimately to reach a trial, I would expect New Balance to have a very strong chance of winning.
But getting to trial is another question entirely.
The vast majority of trademark disputes never reach a jury.
They settle.
This is because in most cases, it can cost both sides anywhere from $1M-$5M just to get through discovery and get a case to trial (depending on the complexity).
The cost of the litigation needs to make sense given the overall financial picture of the issues involved.
For now, absent a quick settlement, the next step in the lawsuit will be for Decathlon to file an Answer.
Josh Gerben, Esq.
Josh Gerben, Esq. is a nationally recognized trademark attorney and the founder of Gerben IP. Since launching the firm in 2008, he has overseen the registration of over 10,000 trademarks and handled over 1,500 trademark disputes. Josh's practice focuses on building and defending global trademark portfolios for clients. These clients include entrepreneurs, private equity-backed businesses, athletes, celebrities, and public companies. Frequently quoted by major media outlets like CNBC, CNN, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal, Josh is widely regarded as a leading authority in trademark law.
Do you need assistance with a trademark matter?
Contact an Attorney Today