Trademark and copyright protection has never been more challenging than it is today.

Emerging technologies are being used by innovators and lawbreakers alike, and often at a faster pace than the law can keep up.

Between increasingly accurate imitations and the use of artificial intelligence to reach and deceive consumers, companies and investigative teams are being forced to rethink their brand protection strategies. 

Innovation is no longer optional.

In this article, we’ve gathered a few relevant trademark and copyright infringement cases, the trends shaping the future of intellectual property, and what it all means for those who need to protect their brand today.

Let’s explore!​

The Digital Shift and Its Impact on Brand Protection

The growing popularity of digital platforms, e-commerce, and social networks has changed how brands connect with consumers. Unfortunately, it has also changed the way counterfeiters work.

Today, they operate globally with the help of cutting-edge technology. They use 3D printing, synthetic materials, and even artificial intelligence to copy products, packaging, and logos with frightening precision.

We are no longer just talking about poor imitations.

In addition to replicas that are algorithmically designed to deceive, brands and intellectual rights holders have to deal with fake online stores, cloned domains, and unauthorized chatbots flooding the market.

And how to deal with this situation?

Identifying isolated infractions is no longer enough. Brands need solutions that can connect the dots, detect repeat offenders, and deliver actionable intelligence in any jurisdiction.

High-Profile Trademark Cases: Lessons from Recent Infringement

The most recent court rulings provide valuable lessons with digital threats becoming increasingly sophisticated.

Below, we highlight three emblematic cases that help to understand what is at stake and what investigation teams can learn from them.

Case Study 1: Lacoste vs. Crocodile International

After more than two decades of legal wrangling, the Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Lacoste, permanently barring Crocodile International from using a similar logo in India.

But why did the court rule in favor of Lacoste, even with old international registrations and a coexistence agreement between the brands?

The court highlighted two points: the territorial right of trademarks and the visual similarity between the logos.

The decision shows that global agreements do not guarantee local protection. Additionally, changing small details in the design, such as reversing the direction of a logo, may not be enough to avoid an infringement.

Many counterfeits start with subtle graphic elements that are nearly imperceptible yet convincing enough to mislead consumers and damage the brand.

This case highlights another critical lesson: In a world where AI-assisted design tools allow you to replicate logos easily, brands must take extra precautions to safeguard their visual identities.

Case Study 2: Adidas vs. Local Infringer

In another ruling out of Delhi, Adidas secured an injunction and symbolic damages of $1,200 against a local seller who copied its iconic three-stripe brand.

The value may seem low, but its impact goes beyond financial.

This case shows us that even small local counterfeiters operating on a limited scale can expand their reach using social networks and marketplaces.

Today, a single account can put counterfeit products in front of thousands of consumers within minutes. Therefore, brands and investigative teams need systems capable of detecting these occurrences quickly, crossing data between channels, and triggering legal responses rapidly.

Case Study 3: Oatly vs. Glebe Farm Foods

Oatly, known for its bold and creative positioning, sued the British Glebe Farm over the name and packaging of its plant-based milk, PureOaty.

The accusation was of brand misuse, with risk of confusion between the products. However, the court ruled in favor of Glebe, claiming that “oaty” is too descriptive to be protected.

This case teaches us that brands with weak names are more fragile from a legal point of view. In times of machine learning, where algorithms can generate similar names en masse, brands that use generic or descriptive terms such as “Wednesday” or “Pear” face incredible difficulty protecting their intellectual property.

In other words, the risks of legal collisions and confusion in the market are much greater.

Copyright Infringement in the Digital Age: The Rise of AI and Social Media

But it’s not just traditional trademark battles that are making headlines: copyright infringement in the digital and AI space is becoming one of the most complex challenges for copyright holders.

The following disputes show how innovation and copyright are on a collision course.

Case Study 4: Music Publishers vs. Twitter

A group of major music publishers such as Sony Music and Universal has filed a lawsuit against Twitter, alleging widespread copyright infringement due to users uploading and sharing unlicensed music.

The problem is not new: User-generated content platforms have always been environments where breaches spread quickly. But now, there is a new aggravating factor.

Today, anyone with access to AI tools such as SUNO.com can generate music, while Sora by OpenAI can create videos and images that could imitate or reuse protected works within minutes. To make matters worse, AI-generated content can rapidly gain traction and often slips past online monitoring systems or IP teams—especially when it avoids using brand names directly.

Without licensing agreements or detection tools, Twitter was left exposed. This is the reality for most platforms that prioritize speed, engagement, and anonymity.

Case Study 5: News Corp vs. Perplexity

Another recent conflict involves News Corp, the parent company of media outlets like The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post. The main accusation is misuse of copyrighted journalistic content without authorization or adequate attribution.

In other words, Perplexity’s AI would be exploiting other people’s work without paying for it.

As the legal system tries to define the boundaries between fair use and infringement, concern is growing about the authorship and intellectual property of AI-generated content.

And the challenge is not just legal. It’s technical.

How do you know if your content is being used without permission?

The debate highlights a growing tension between advancing technology and copyright protection. For brands, enforcement has entered a new era that demands innovative tools to spot what human eyes can’t.

Emerging Trends in Trademark and Copyright Infringement

Trademark and copyright infringement tactics have evolved. Today, they involve generative AI, deepfakes, global marketplaces, and social networks, all operating with unprecedented speed and range.

Combating this problem requires more than vigilance. It takes intelligence.

At Hubstream, advanced technology is woven into the fabric of our platform. Our AI-powered tools detect subtle differences at scale, reveal hidden patterns, and deliver actionable insights that help teams respond swiftly and accurately. Our mission is clear: transforming emerging technology into a real advantage for those who protect brands like you.

Want to see Hubstream in action? Schedule a demo today and discover how we can help your team protect what matters most: your brand, reputation, and customers.