20 years too late: Nike finally sues BAPE over trademark infringements

By Mason Berlinka

Updated May 30, 2023 at 01:07 PM

Reading time: 2 minutes

The long-standing understanding between Nike and A Bathing Ape (BAPE) has finally come to an end. What was once rumoured in streetwear circles to be a blind eye turned, Nike has now changed its tune, setting its sights on the Japanese label as its next target on its recent crusade against infringement, copies and dupes.

On Wednesday 25 January 2023, Reuters reported that a federal court lawsuit had been filed against BAPE for trademark infringement on Nike’s legendary silhouettes—the Nike Air Force 1, Air Jordan 1, and the Nike Dunk. It cited that “BAPE’s current footwear business revolves around copying Nike’s iconic designs.”


View this post on Instagram


A post shared by A BATHING APE® OFFICIAL (@bape_japan)

For those who don’t follow the streetwear scene closely, BAPE was founded by renowned Teriyaki Boyz DJ, Nigo (who took over as Kenzo creative director in 2022).

The aforementioned is a longtime hip hop collaborator and close friend of Pharrell Williams, with whom he has partnered with on countless occasions. The Japanese label was launched in 1993 and rose to prominence in the following decade as over-the-top and boisterous streetwear began to rule the rap scene. Remember those Shark hoodies? You have Nigo to thank for that.

The multiskilled creative’s legendary BAPE STA debuted on the scene in the early 2000s and sought to capitalise on the popularity of the Nike Air Force 1. And capitalise it did. The shoe bears the same silhouette as Nike’s classic but has subtle differences like the use of patent leather, and BAPE’s own Star design replacing the Nike Swoosh.

Streetwear fans have long speculated as to why Nike never did anything about it sooner, but fashion YouTuber The Casual said on the topic that it simply came down to the fact that US patent law only protects utilities for 20 years. The AF1 first appeared in 1982, and the BAPE STA was available commercially from 2002. Paired with just enough changes to make the shoe different, BAPE has been able to get away with its loving copycat shoe for years.

So, why is the sports industry titan able to go after BAPE now? Nike claims that the company, now owned by Hong Kong retailer I.T Ltd, has “drastically increased the volume and scope of its infringement” since 2021, which up until that point saw sporadic releases.

In a surprising statement found in the lawsuit, what sneakerheads had long speculated over was confirmed, “BAPE’s copying is and has always been unacceptable to Nike and because BAPE’s infringements have recently grown to become a significant danger to Nike’s rights, Nike must act now.”

According to Nike, BAPE has “refused” to stop infringing on the multinational corporation’s trademark when asked, which is why it’s now facing legal action. The ultimate aim of the lawsuit is monetary gain for Nike and a subsequent termination of the famous Air Force 1-inspired shoe.

Users online have been speculating over whether or not the courts will rule in Nike’s favour on this, given that it’s let it slide somewhat over the years. Even if US patent law would have made it difficult to challenge, the option was still there for the multi-million dollar company.

This lawsuit is just another battle in Nike’s holy war against copycats, with MSCHF—the controversial art collective behind the Lil Nas X Nike ‘Satan shoe’ —being one of the most talked about targets. Sneaker reselling platform StockX was also met with a Nike lawsuit in 2022.

Nike is trying to secure its future by stopping anyone from stepping on its toes, or in this case—shoes. Is it worth the bad press it’s going to face for chasing after a cherished streetwear name like BAPE? We don’t think so. Thom Browne’s successes against Nike rival Adidas should be enough of a warning sign.

Keep On Reading

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

AI-generated images of Donald Trump with Black voters spread before US presidential election

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Problematic Christmas songs you probably shouldn’t sing anymore

By Charlie Sawyer

Mystery girl behind Nigel Farage milkshake saga sparks online theories

By Charlie Sawyer

New Armie Hammer ex-girlfriend reveals actor has only gotten worse since cannibalism claims

By Charlie Sawyer

Golden Globes 2024: Kylie Jenner forbids Timothée Chalamet from taking picture with Selena Gomez

By Charlie Sawyer

A guide on how to save on your energy bills after CEO of British Gas owner admits he can’t justify his £4.5M salary

By Louis Shankar

Rishi Sunak’s early general election won’t save the Conservatives, their time is well and truly up

By Emma O'Regan-Reidy

Is BookTok ruining reading? Critics seem to think so

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Inside Johnny Depp’s bizarre new bromance with Saudi Crown Prince MBS

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Julia Fox’s recent fashion statement sparks intense criticism from FGM survivors

By Jack Ramage

Findom explained: Understanding financial domination in relationships

By Abby Amoakuh

Jeffrey Epstein flight logs: Prince Andrew controversy resurfaces as nearly 200 names to be released

By Abby Amoakuh

Everything you need to know about Taylor Swift’s new album The Tortured Poets Department

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

From Love & Hip Hop to the latest Offset drama, let’s unpack the queen that is Cardi B

By Abby Amoakuh

Who is Brit Smith, the smaller artist JoJo Siwa allegedly stole Karma from?

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

ISIS started trending on X after the terrorist group allegedly threatened to attack Champions League

By Charlie Sawyer

Timothée Chalamet finally addresses Kylie Jenner and Selena Gomez feud in TMZ video

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Lingerie brand Honey Birdette under fire for incredibly tone-deaf campaign tied to Israel-Gaza war

By Abby Amoakuh

What is Megan’s Law and what does it have to do with Nicki Minaj and Megan Thee Stallion’s beef?

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Who was the goblin who crashed the 2024 Emmy Awards red carpet?