As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.
Pudgy Penguins started as a non-fungible token (“NFT”) in 2021, but, as the NFT market struggled, Pudgy Penguins started selling plush toys and clothes with names such as “Pudgy Penguins", “Pengu Nation” and “Forever Pudgy Penguins”.
According to the complaint, PEI claims that Pudgy Penguins’ apparel and branding features a penguin motif and a group of marks that are confusingly similar to its federally registered PENGUIN marks. PEI further notes that it has been using the penguin logo design on apparel since 1956 and the “penguin” word mark since 1967. Accordingly, PEI asserts that Pudgy Penguins, which began selling its apparel in 2023, had “constructive notice” of PEI’s ownership of the PENGUIN marks.
PEI reportedly attempted to address the alleged trademark infringement before filing the lawsuit by sending a cease-and-desist letter. PEI also opposed Pudgy Penguin’s application to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to register “I am my penguin, and my penguin is me” and other Penguin-related marks. Given Pudgy Penguin’s continued use of allegedly infringing marks, however, PEI initiated the current suit in which it asserts trademark infringement, dilution, and unfair competition claims.
PEI is seeking injunctive relief to enjoin Pudgy Penguins from using the allegedly infringing marks, cancellation of the trademark registrations and monetary relief, including disgorgement of profits derived from merchandise bearing the disputed marks.
Authors: Emily Groper and Laxsega Sivaloganathan, 2025/26 Articling Student-At-Law
Photo Credit: https://unsplash.com/@66north
Authors
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Kansas City Chiefs Stars Sued for Trademark Infringement Over Steakhouse
The sneaker company, 1587 Sneakers, is reportedly suing Kansas City Chiefs players, Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce, along with their restaurant partners, for trademark infringement.1587 Sneakers… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence…