Nike’s $60-Million Lawsuit Against The Shoe Surgeon Explained

Renowned sneaker customiser Dominic Ciambrone, most well-known as , was just sued by for a whopping $60 million. The Shoe Surgeon is fresh off being stung by French luxury goods brand , who are seeking compensation for damages and legal expenses. Now, Nike are looking to do the same, filing for a trademark infringement lawsuit in the Southern District of New York, originally reported by @sneakerlegal.

Within the lawsuit, Nike lawyers explicitly state that this case is not concerning the one-of-one customisations, but rather Ciambrone's 'attempts to build an entire multifaceted retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights and the associated goodwill that Nike spent decades accruing.’ After all, Nike have actually worked together with The Shoe Surgeon on one-off commissioned customised sneakers for a selection of their sponsored athletes like LeBron James. Nike do reference them working together on numerous occasions, mentioning that they didn’t interfere with one-off commissions and even came to an agreement with the creator for an Air Jordan 13 colab. However, Team Swoosh clearly makes it known that this didn’t give the customiser ‘unfettered right’ to use Nike’s intellectual property.

Throughout the document, Team Swoosh double down on their non-concern for TSS’s ‘one-of-one customizations on commission’ but instead focus on the customiser’s ‘Illicit Nike Empire’. This mainly focuses on the sneaker customiser’s academy, where the public is taught to create their own versions of Nike products, including the , , and silhouettes. Nike goes on to state that The Shoe Surgeon is teaching a course in ‘Nike counterfeiting 101’. They are stating that their brick-and-mortars, courses and purchasable bundles are infringing on their trademarks and are misleading consumers to believing that Nike is affiliated with their business. Further in the document, Team Swoosh mention that they have tried on multiple occasions to resolve the Defendant's intellectual property violations outside of the litigation context. Defendants even appeared at times to comply with Nike’s cease and desist demands. It seems as though this has been an ongoing conversation between the two, but Beaverton lawyers state that, "In actuality, Defendants were playing a shell game, removing infringing shoes from their website only to continue selling them at a later date or through alternate sales channels."

Interestingly, Nike also look to The Shoe Surgeon’s use of ‘collaborations’ and the creation of infringing logos that appear that the two have collaborated. Specifically mentioned are the x Air Jordan 1s that TSS had available for commission, as well as infringing -themed customised creations. Nike’s issue with this was that ‘these uses of third-party branding in connection with the Nike Asserted Marks creates the false impression that Nike is affiliated with the third-party brand or otherwise endorses or sponsors the third-party brand’. Beaverton lawyers state that these unauthorised collaborations and partnerships with third parties and the Swoosh are ‘unlawful’.

Since the lawsuit has been made public, Nike issued the following statement:

‘Our goal is to make sure consumers are not misled and have access to authentic NIKE, Inc. products that are authorized and created according to our high standards with the performance benefits they expect. It is unfortunate that after many attempts to resolve this matter privately, we’ve had to take legal action against the Shoe Surgeon for counterfeiting, mass customization and trademark infringement. In order to safeguard our brand and IP, and aligned with Nike’s commitment to protect the consumer from counterfeit Nike product, we are left with no choice but to seek a legal solution to address how the Shoe Surgeon is constructing counterfeit “Nike” footwear from scratch and selling it as officially branded product. Further, the Shoe Surgeon is teaching others to create counterfeit “Nike” sneakers. These activities are illegal, deceive consumers and create confusion in the marketplace around source, authenticity and quality of Nike products. We valued our relationship with the Shoe Surgeon and do not have any issues with the limited, one-of-one customization he’s been doing for us or his clients, when allowed under Nike-sponsored athletes’ contracts. In fact, we value opportunities for our athletes, consumers and partners to express themselves through their own style and creativity.’

Nike are seeking the courts to stop The Shoe Surgeon and fellow defendants from selling what they deem counterfeit shoes, plus kits, bundles and instructions on how to create Nike sneakers. They are also seeking statutory damages of over 30 trademarks, which totals $60 million or the profits from the defendants ‘counterfeiting’ along with attorney fees.

Team Swoosh has had weird relationships with sneaker customisers over the years. Back in 2017, Nike actually gave their over Ju Working On Projects, aka Julian Gaines’s sneaker customisation. They actually employed the creator, who went on to work for Nike in an official capacity. However, between the years of 2020 and 2021, Nike went on a rampage. They sued over ‘bootleg’ that featured iconic colourways like the ‘Pigeon’ and 'Heineken'. Then after that they set their sights on a over an Amazon-themed Air Jordan 1.

More updates to the case against The Shoe Surgeon versus Nike will surely pop up over the coming weeks, so stay locked to Sneaker Freaker to keep in the loop.

Want to learn how to (not) get sued by Nike? Head !