In the sportswear industry, a single successful design can generate millions in revenue. But that same design, copied and sold by competitors, can erode brand value and market share within weeks. For activewear brands, protecting intellectual property is not a legal formality. It is a business necessity.
The stakes are substantial. Major brands invest heavily in design innovation and actively enforce their rights. Lululemon has pursued legal action against retailers selling knockoffs of its signature jackets, while Adidas has spent decades defending its three-stripe mark in courts across multiple continents. For brands sourcing through OEM sportswear and ODM sportswear partnerships, understanding IP protection is essential for safeguarding brand value and maintaining competitive advantage.
This article examines the intellectual property protection landscape for sportswear brands. It covers design protection strategies, trademark considerations, patent options, and the critical issue of managing confidentiality with manufacturing partners. It also explains how brands, factories, and IP protection work together in the sportswear supply chain.
Why Sportswear Is Vulnerable to Copying
The very nature of sportswear makes it susceptible to copying. Designs must be visually appealing and commercially viable, which means they are visible to the public. Once a garment is on the market, competitors can purchase it and reverse-engineer the design. The production process for garments is relatively simple compared to other manufactured goods, making copying inexpensive.
In the apparel industry, the fast fashion business model depends on rapid copying. This creates constant pressure to launch new designs and to protect them. The sportswear industry is a frequent target for intellectual property disputes. In one recent case, Lululemon sued Peloton for infringing six of its design patents after Peloton decided to manufacture its own apparel rather than continuing to source through their OEM agreement. The case illustrates how IP issues can arise when supply chain relationships change.
For businesses engaged in sports clothing production in China, the risk is particularly acute. A Chinese manufacturer’s journey from OEM to owning a global brand, like the story behind the 2026 World Cup jerseys supplied by China-based Kalme, shows that a proactive IP strategy can transform a factory into a brand owner. However, without protection, factories remain in a vulnerable position where the value they create is captured by the brand owner.
Linking IP, Brands, and Factories
A factory’s ability to offer services like yoga clothing wholesale depends on its relationship with the brand. The brand provides designs, and the factory produces them. The intellectual property belongs to the brand, not the factory, unless otherwise agreed. This distinction is fundamental.
When a brand engages a factory for custom gym clothing production, it must ensure that the factory has no rights to the designs. Standard OEM agreements state that the brand owns all rights to the designs, and the factory is prohibited from using them for any other purpose. Many contracts specify that the factory cannot use the brand’s information for its own processing or sale. This prevents factories from selling the same designs to other brands or producing them for their own label.
However, enforcement is challenging, especially in cross-border partnerships. As one factory owner in China noted after securing patents for his innovations, “previously only felt that doing a good job is enough, now understand that innovation must have a patent ‘moat’.” This recognition is increasingly common among Chinese manufacturers. Factories that invest in their own innovation and IP protection can become more valuable partners for brands.
Trademark Protection: Building Brand Equity
Trademarks protect brand names, logos, and other source identifiers. In sportswear, trademarks are essential for building brand recognition and preventing consumer confusion. The most common form of trademark protection is for brand names and logos. These marks identify the source of the goods. In the sportswear industry, brand names like Nike, Adidas, and Lululemon are among the most valuable assets.
Position Marks
Position marks protect design features at a specific location on a product. Adidas’s three-stripe design is the most prominent example. However, a 2025 UK High Court decision invalidated eight of Adidas’s position marks, holding that they lacked the clarity and precision required for registration. The court found that the registrations covered too many variations in stripe placement, width, and color. This illustrates the challenge of protecting design elements that vary across product lines and emphasizes the importance of specificity in trademark registrations.
Color Marks
Color combinations can also function as trademarks if they acquire distinctiveness. In a recent case, 7-Eleven sued Nike over a shoe colorway that used the convenience store chain’s signature red, green, and orange color scheme. The case highlights that distinctive color combinations can be protected as brand assets even across product categories. For women’s workout clothing brands, developing distinctive color palettes can create recognizable brand signatures.
Enforcement
Trademark infringement occurs when a competitor uses a similar mark in a way that is likely to cause consumer confusion. In a case involving a Chinese e-commerce seller, Lululemon sued an individual for selling counterfeit yoga pants online. The seller was found liable for trademark infringement because the product listings used “LULULEMON” and “lulu” in their titles, and the actual garments bore counterfeit marks. This case illustrates the practical reality: online enforcement requires monitoring listings and taking action against infringers.
Design Patents: Protecting Visual Appearance
Design patents protect the ornamental design of a functional item. In the United States, design patents are available for new, original, and ornamental designs for articles of manufacture. However, design patents provide narrow protection. Fashion designs are notoriously difficult to prosecute via design patents because the standard for infringement requires virtually an exact copy.
For this reason, brands often combine design patents with other forms of IP protection. If you can couple the design patent with other IP, such as a utility patent for functionality or trade dress having a longer history of consumer identification, there is a greater chance of success.
In the PUMA v. Brooks case, PUMA asserted a design patent against Brooks over the ornamental design of a running shoe. The case demonstrates that design patents are actively enforced in the sportswear industry, but also that disputes over infringement can be complex and protracted.
Protecting Your Brand with Factories: The Confidentiality Agreement
When working with manufacturers, brands often share their most valuable assets: design concepts, technical specifications, fabric sources, and production timelines. Protecting this confidential information is essential to prevent copying. A standard OEM agreement includes provisions that define what information is confidential, prohibit the factory from disclosing confidential information to third parties, prohibit the factory from using the information for any purpose other than fulfilling the order, and specify that the obligations survive termination of the agreement.
These provisions also state that the factory must not retain garment samples and related technical data without the brand’s permission. This prevents factories from building a library of brand designs that could later be used to produce similar garments.
The Limits of Confidentiality
Confidentiality protection is not absolute. In one case, a brand attempted to protect its clothing designs as trade secrets after showing them to distributors at a product ordering conference. The court found that because the designs had been shown to a group of potential customers, they were no longer secret. This case underscores that once a design is shown to others, it may lose its status as a trade secret. Brands must be careful about when and to whom they disclose new designs.
Building a Comprehensive IP Strategy
For sportswear brands, a comprehensive IP strategy should include:
Secure Trademark Registrations
Register brand names, logos, and key slogans in all major markets. Consider position mark registrations for distinctive design features, but ensure the description is precise and clear. For color marks, document the specific color codes and their consistent use across products.
Use Patents for Functional Innovations
File utility patent applications for new technologies, materials, or manufacturing processes. File design patent applications for distinctive product appearances. Recognize that design patents have limited scope and should be combined with other protections.
Implement Strong Confidentiality Agreements
Use robust confidentiality agreements with all suppliers and manufacturers. Ensure the agreements define confidential information broadly, impose clear non-disclosure and non-use obligations, specify the consequences of breach, and survive termination of the production agreement.
Monitor the Market
Regularly monitor online platforms and retail channels for potential infringements. Use technology tools and professional IP services to aid monitoring. Customs recordation can help prevent counterfeit imports, as demonstrated by Kalme’s partnership with Chinese customs authorities.
Act Quickly on Infringements
When infringement is detected, act quickly to enforce rights. This may involve sending cease and desist letters, filing complaints with online platforms, or initiating legal proceedings. Proactive enforcement signals that the brand takes IP protection seriously.
Conclusion
Intellectual property protection is a fundamental business imperative for sportswear brands. From securing trademarks and design patents to implementing robust confidentiality agreements, each measure contributes to safeguarding the value created through design and innovation.
The relationship between brands and factories is central to IP protection in the sportswear industry. Brands own the designs; factories execute them. Clear contractual provisions on IP ownership and confidentiality are essential. Without them, brands risk losing control over their designs and compromising their competitive advantage.
For OEM sportswear and ODM sportswear partnerships, IP protection is not just about legal compliance. It is about protecting the creativity, innovation, and brand equity that drive business success. Whether you are developing yoga clothing wholesale lines, gym clothing custom collections, or full product ranges for women’s workout clothing brands, a proactive IP strategy is the foundation of long-term brand value.
