When NFTs Meet Trademarks: A Whimsical Legal Circus!

by

Key Takeaways

NFTs are giving trademark laws a run for their money as courts try to fit square pegs into round holes in the digital realm. Major cases are causing a ruckus, pushing companies to protect their brand identities in the virtual world.

Can you trademark a non-fungible token? The courts are scratching their heads and saying, “Well, maybe!” Old brand protection laws are being twisted and contorted to fit a new digital world, much to the delight of lawyers everywhere. 🤓

Trademarks exist for one simple reason: so you know who you’re buying from and don’t get duped by knockoffs. This system protects the hard-earned reputation of businesses. But what happens when the “product” is just a bunch of code floating around in cyberspace? 🤔

The whole point of a trademark is to stop shoppers from getting confused. It answers the burning question, “Who’s behind this?” The law relies on concepts like distinctiveness and use in commerce to prevent one seller’s goods from being mistaken for another’s. Applying these ideas to the wild, wild west of NFTs is a legal headache of epic proportions. 😩

Oh, and let’s not forget the common mix-up between copyright and trademark. Here’s a quick guide:

  • Copyright: Covers the actual creative content—the picture, the song, the video file. Just because you buy an NFT doesn’t mean you own the copyright to the art itself. 🎨
  • Trademark: Covers the brand name or logo used to market the NFT project. It’s what separates Bored Ape Yacht Club from CryptoPunks. 🐵

Courtroom Brawls Over Digital Goods

A few major lawsuits are drawing the battle lines for how brands can and can’t be used in the digital marketplace. Let’s dive into the drama!

Hermès v. Rothschild: A Big Win for Big Brands

Hermès, the luxury fashion brand, took artist Mason Rothschild to court over his “MetaBirkins” NFT project—digital images of furry handbags that looked suspiciously like the iconic Birkin bag. In February 2023, a New York jury ruled in favor of Hermès, declaring that Rothschild had infringed on the company’s trademark.

Hermès argued that the NFTs could mislead consumers into thinking they were officially affiliated with the brand. Rothschild defended his project as protected artistic expression, but the judge called him a “swindler.” Ouch! 🙈

This case set a strong precedent, warning creators that using famous trademarks for digital products could land them in hot water. However, the legal battle isn’t over—an appeals court is now weighing where to draw the line between art and trademark infringement.

Nike v. StockX: It’s Complicated

Nike’s legal tussle with resale platform StockX has been a real head-scratcher. The conflict began in early 2022 when Nike sued StockX over its “Vault NFTs”—digital tokens representing real Nike sneakers stored by StockX.

Nike claimed that these NFTs misused its brand and misled consumers into thinking they were officially affiliated with the company. In March 2025, the court partially sided with Nike, confirming that StockX had sold counterfeit Nike shoes. However, the bigger questions—whether StockX’s use of Nike’s trademarks in its NFT project was legal—remain unanswered and are headed for a full trial.

The outcome of this case could set a major precedent for how digital marketplaces handle NFTs connected to physical goods. 🧐

Yuga Labs v. Ryder Ripps: A Reversal for Bored Apes

Yuga Labs, the company behind the Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC), faced a setback in its legal battle with artist Ryder Ripps. In July 2025, an appeals court overturned a $9 million award that Yuga Labs had previously won.

The court ruled that Yuga Labs hadn’t shown enough evidence that Ripps’s lookalike NFTs were likely to confuse consumers. Although Yuga Labs lost this round, the decision was a significant moment for the NFT industry.

The court confirmed that NFTs are legally considered “goods,” which means other NFT creators can pursue trademark infringement claims—provided they can prove consumer confusion. 🎭

It All Comes Down to Confusion

All these cases boil down to one legal test: the “likelihood of confusion.” Would a regular person looking at the product be confused about who made it or if it’s officially endorsed?

Courts are now figuring out how this applies online. In the Hermès case, the fact that luxury brands were already dabbling in NFTs made it seem more plausible that customers would believe the “MetaBirkins” were the real deal. Hermès even brought receipts, showing news articles and social media posts from people who were genuinely confused. 🤯

How the World Is Handling NFT Trademarks

Countries are tackling this issue at their own pace, each with their own flair.

United States: America is letting the courts lead the way by applying old laws to new tech. A 2024 Congressional report decided no new laws were needed yet, but admitted people are pretty confused about their rights when they buy an NFT. 🤦‍♂️

European Union: The EU updated its rules to specifically mention virtual goods and NFTs. But they’re picky; you can’t just trademark “virtual goods.” You have to specify what they are, like “virtual clothing.” This gets tricky since EU trademarks are tied to territories, but blockchains are borderless. 🗺️

China: A Chinese court has already recognized NFTs as protected virtual property and held a platform liable for infringement. The government is interested in metaverse technology but keeps a tight leash on the market and has banned cryptocurrencies outright. 🇨🇳

What’s Next for Trademarks in the Metaverse?

“Phygital” NFTs—digital tokens linked to a real-world object—create a whole new set of problems. The biggest challenge is that buying the NFT doesn’t automatically make you the legal owner of the physical item. That relationship is all about the sales contract and what the seller promised you.

So, the rulebook for trademarks in the metaverse is still being written, mostly by judges in real time. Experts think existing laws will keep being stretched and adapted, though some are pushing for new legislation to clear things up.

For now, companies are being told to get ahead of the problem by filing trademarks that explicitly name virtual goods and NFTs. As our physical and digital lives continue to merge, protecting a brand’s identity in these new, invisible marketplaces is only going to get more important. 🚀

Read More

2025-08-01 01:52