And its intellectual property rights

By –Aishwarya Jhamum13fd15group c

Nike Inc is the world’s leadingInnovator in athletic footwear,

apparelequipments and accessories

NIKE PRODUCTS

NIKE AND ITS IPRBeing the largest sports brand of world, Nike needs to have some certain ipr in order to safe guard its products and services. The intellectual property rights that Nike is registered to are PATENT and TRADEMARK.

• The Nike, Just Do it logo trademark was designed by Carolyn Davidson in 1971 for $35. Nike, Inc. got its name from the Greek Goddess of Victory, Nike.

• The swoosh in the logo represents the wing of the Goddess.

• The solid corporate logo design swoosh was registered as a trademark in 1995

• The Nike logo is the official registered trademark of Nike. Nike sponsors many athletes and sports teams around the world, with the trademarks of “Just do It” and the swoosh logo.

• NIKE has an exclusive, worldwide license to make and sell footwear using patented “Air” technology.

• Some of the early NIKE AIR® patents have expired, which may enable competitors to use certain types of similar technology.

• Also have hundreds of U.S. and foreign utility patents, and thousands of U.S. and foreign design patents covering components and features used in various athletic and leisure shoes, apparel, and equipment.

Case studies• Nike vs. YUMs

• Nike, Inc., sued Already, LLC  Yums, for selling shoes that allegedly infringed on Nike’s trademark covering the Air Force 1 shoe line.

• Yums counterclaimed to cancel Nike’s trademark. Shortly after Yums’s counterclaim, Nike dropped its claim and promised Yums that Nike would not assert its trademark against any of Yums’ current or previous products.

• The district court dismissed Yums’s counterclaim and the court of appeals affirmed the dismissal.

• . Nike argues that a court cannot hear a trademark claim without a controversy, and that Nike’s promise not to sue eliminated any controversy involving the Air Force 1 trademark.

• . The Supreme Court’s decision here may determine whether intellectual property owners can drop infringement actions without having to defend counterclaims challenging their intellectual property rights.

Nike vs. Adidas

In a stunning reversal, a court in Nuremberg, Germany has ruled against Nike in its legal battle against adidas. In the original injunction brought against adidas by Nike, the American company contended that adidas had infringed its patent with the adizero Primeknit; both the Primeknit and Nike’s Flyknit employ a one-piece fused yarn upper. adidas’s legal approach centered on the fact that both shoes boast intertwined yarns in the construction and it’s a technique that has been employed since the 1940s. With this legal victory, Nike’s Flyknit patent becomes nullified and adidas can now resume production of the adizero Primeknit and other shoes that employ Primeknit technology. Following the ruling, a Nike spokeswoman said, “We will continue to aggressively protect our intellectual property rights, including through the conclusion of this interim injunction proceeding as well as in a formal infringement case,” so expect this ruling to be one of the first steps in longer legal process.

THANK YOU