Skip to main content
padlock icon - secure page this page is secure

Sportswear identification, distinctive design and manufacturer logos – issues from the front line

Buy Article:

$19.54 + tax (Refund Policy)

In 2006, Adidas issued a legal claim against tennis' Grand Slam Committee (GSC). The claim alleged infringements of European competition law resulting from the GSC's ruling that Adidas' three-stripe design was a manufacturer's identification and would therefore be subject to size restrictions. This case study paper sets out to examine issues pertaining to the legal case and traces its development from instigation to resolution. In particular, the case study examines the nature of the sports and tennis-wear markets, as well as the history and development of Adidas and the Adidas brand. In turn, it analyses three terms that were fundamental to the legal case ("manufacturer identification", "distinctive design" and "manufacturer logo"). The case study concludes by identifying some possible future issues for the parties involved.
No Reference information available - sign in for access.
No Citation information available - sign in for access.
No Supplementary Data.
No Article Media
No Metrics

Keywords: BRANDS; IDENTIFICATION LOGO; SPORT; SPORTSWEAR; TENNIS

Document Type: Research Article

Publication date: March 1, 2009

More about this publication?
  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more