New Balance filed a trademark infringement and dilution suit against luxury sneaker brand Golden Goose. The dispute centered on whether Golden Goose’s “Dad-Star” sneaker unlawfully encroaches on the distinctive trade dress associated with New Balance’s 990 model. How might litigation surveys help adjudicators decide this matter?
Case Background
New Balance introduced its 990 sneaker in 1982 and has marketed the model continuously for more than four decades. The 990 is an allegedly iconic product, generating hundreds of millions in revenue and benefiting from careful, sustained marketing investment. The 990 has undergone multiple iterations, but New Balance has asserted that the core design elements have remained consistent and distinctive over time.
Gray-toned sneakers reportedly account for approximately one-third of New Balance’s total shoe sales, and the current 990 model retails for approximately $185. Golden Goose, a luxury sneaker brand, introduced a model called the “Dad-Star,” which retails for approximately $625.
New Balance filed a federal complaint in Massachusetts alleging that Golden Goose infringed on its 990 trade dress rights. Specifically, New Balance alleged that Golden Goose’s use of gray tones, combined with marketing the shoe as a “Dad” sneaker, infringes and dilutes the trade dress associated with the 990. That trade dress involves a specific combination of visual elements, including the gray color palette and structural features, including layered mesh and suede uppers, overlay bars, a two-tone midsole, a contrasting outsole, reflective accents, and reinforced rear eyelets.
In the complaint, New Balance also alleged that its gray color scheme has acquired secondary meaning, citing prior cases in which courts recognized trademark protection for distinctive colors, including Tiffany blue and T-Mobile pink. New Balance alleged that Golden Goose’s design and naming choices are likely to cause consumer confusion regarding affiliation, sponsorship, or approval.
Consumer Perception and Trade Dress
Legal issues arising in this case that may require consumer survey research include whether the Golden Goose “Dad-Star” sneaker is likely to cause consumer confusion or dilute New Balance trade dress, and whether New Balance’s asserted trade dress has acquired secondary meaning. New Balance alleges that consumers are likely to believe that Golden Goose’s product is affiliated with, connected to, or endorsed by New Balance. Golden Goose could, in turn, contest whether certain trade dress elements are protectable, and/or whether the gray color has acquired secondary meaning.
The Role of Consumer Survey Evidence
Consumer survey research is accepted as evidence to measure likelihood of confusion, secondary meaning, and dilution in trademark infringement disputes. Properly designed surveys can provide evidence regarding whether consumers associate particular design elements with a single source and whether competing products create mistaken beliefs about origin or affiliation. Survey evidence could be used to assess whether the gray color scheme and overall design of the New Balance 990 have acquired secondary meaning among consumers. This consumer survey evidence could help determine whether New Balance’s asserted trade dress is protectable and whether Golden Goose’s product infringes or dilutes those rights.
IMS Legal Strategies designs, conducts, and testifies in trademark infringement matters, particularly in cases involving consumer confusion, secondary meaning, and dilution.
