Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · Product & Design · Product decision · 2022–2024

The influencer sneaker brand that copied Air Jordans — and owed Nike $1 million

Kool Kiy sold Air Jordan 1 and Dunk lookalikes with a lightning-bolt logo. Nike sued — and a $1M consent judgment ended the brand.

Nike · BY KIY LLC · 2024-05

What happened

Kool Kiy, operated by BY KIY LLC, was an influencer-driven sneaker brand that sold shoes closely resembling Nike's Air Jordan 1 and Dunk. Like co-defendant Omi in a Hellcat, Kool Kiy replaced the Nike Swoosh with a lightning-bolt motif and marketed the shoes through social media to sneaker enthusiasts. The brand built significant hype, with drops selling out and resale prices climbing on secondary platforms.

In December 2022, Nike named Kool Kiy as a co-defendant alongside Omi in a trademark infringement lawsuit filed in the Southern District of New York (Case 1:23-cv-02431). Nike accused both brands of copying the trade dress of its most iconic sneakers and named their shared Chinese manufacturer Xiamen Wandering Planet as enabling the production.

In May 2024, Kool Kiy agreed to a consent judgment ordering the brand to pay Nike $1 million and submit to a permanent injunction barring the sale of the contested designs. The consent judgment ended the case without a trial — Kool Kiy accepted the penalty rather than fight the claims. The $1 million figure was one-eighth of the $8 million default judgment entered against co-defendant Omi in the same lawsuit.

The case illustrated the risk of building a sneaker brand on the silhouette of a trademarked design. Kool Kiy's social media traction — the engine of its commercial success — was also what attracted Nike's legal attention, turning hype into evidence of willful infringement.

Why it happened

  • Hype that sells knockoffs is also evidence of willful infringement. The same social media reach that built the brand proved the scale of the violation.
  • A $1M consent judgment is a brand-ending penalty for a small company, and it came without the chance to argue the merits in court.
  • Kool Kiy and Omi were co-defendants in the same lawsuit. The one who showed up paid $1M; the one who didn't paid $8M.
What it cost$1M consent judgment; brand endedcostly

The lesson

An influencer audience is not a legal moat. Selling knockoffs of a trademarked design — even with a logo swap — is a countdown to a court order, not a business.

Sources

spotted an error? The club wants to know.

Comments · 0

    Sign in to join the comments.

    More like this

    Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →