Trademark infringement through sports shoe design: Legal assessment of an OLG decision in favor of PUMA
The Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf, by its ruling on November 4, 2025 (Case No.: I-20 U 35/25), expressly strengthened PUMA’s trademark position regarding the protection of distinctive marks on sports shoes. The core of the legal dispute concerned the specific design of a third-party sports shoe, which PUMA claimed adopted trademark-protected design elements. This subsequent article examines the decision, its (economically significant) background, and the legal considerations in the context of European trademark law.
Background of the Proceedings and Conflict Situation
Initial Situation and Statement of Claim
PUMA is the owner of an EU trademark registered for sports shoes, which includes a specific side stripe design – a mark with significant market recognition and distinctiveness. The defendant manufacturer marketed its sports shoes that bore similarities to the PUMA mark in terms of form, arrangement, and impression of the side stripe. According to PUMA, this created the risk among the relevant public that the shoes might originate from the same company.
PUMA sued for injunction, disclosure, declaration of damages liability, and destruction of the contested products, primarily relying on trademark law under the EU Trademark Regulation (EUTMR).
Defendant’s Side and Defense Strategy
The defendant manufacturer denied the trademark relevance of the adopted design elements, arguing that it was merely decorative. Thus, an infringement of trademark rights was not detectable. Furthermore, they referenced other shoe designs on the market that allegedly featured similar elements.
Reasons for the Decision of the OLG Düsseldorf
Scope of Protection and Distinctive Character of the PUMA Mark
The OLG first determined that the side stripe in question is integral to the recognition value of the PUMA brand. Due to decades of use, the distinctive character is also enhanced. This justifies broad protection – not only against identical but also similar design adoptions, provided there is a risk of confusion or mental association.
Comparative Evaluation of Shoe Models
In a comprehensive overall assessment, the court analyzed the design of the defendant’s shoe and identified numerous similarities with the side stripe claimed by PUMA under trademark law. Crucially, from the perspective of average consumers, at least a mental connection to the brand owner could be established – even without a direct risk of confusion in the strict sense.
Risk of Misleading and Exploitation
The court identified not only a risk of confusion in the use of the contested design elements but also deemed the targeted exploitation of the reputation and advertising power of the PUMA brand as fulfilled. The defendant’s use of the protected mark unfairly enhances the market appeal of their products and exploits the investments associated with the brand.
Legal Consequences and Economic Impacts
Scope of Injunctive and Removal Claims
The OLG affirmed all asserted claims for injunction, disclosure, damages, and destruction of the contested products under Art. 9 EUTMR and the corresponding provisions of the Trademark Act. The defendant must thus cease production and distribution of the affected sports shoes and remove any remaining stock.
Industry-Wide Importance of the Verdict
The judgment highlights increased sensitivity in IP law, especially in protecting well-known brands against imitation in product design. For companies in the sporting goods industry and beyond, this serves as a clear indication that trademark rights can and must be protected not only formally but also in terms of economic functionality and market position.
Prejudicial Effect and Ongoing Developments
Although the decision of the OLG Düsseldorf is currently final, it remains to be seen to what extent a supreme court review may occur. Until any further proceedings conclude, the presumption of innocence applies to the defendant. The detailed reasoning of the judgment is documented at https://urteile.news/OLG-Duesseldorf_I-20-U-3525_Herstellerin-von-Sportschuhen-verletzt-Markenrechte-von-PUMA~N35533.
Outlook and Legal Perspectives in IP Law
The underlying facts illustrate how central the consistent enforcement of trademark rights has become in modern economic life – particularly with characteristic product designs in international competition. Companies are facing an increasingly complex legal landscape, the careful analysis and strategic assessment of which significantly contributes to protecting their rights in domestic and foreign markets.
For further legal issues related to the defense or acquisition of trademark rights, the scope of protection, or avoiding conflicts with existing foreign marks, comprehensive advice offers crucial advantages. For more information on tailored solutions, please visit Legal Advice in IP Law.
