By Gary Symons
TLL Editor in Chief
Footwear and fitness giant Nike is suing a small sneaker designer for allegedly putting out copies of its Air Jordan 1 High sneakers.
In a complaint filed in New Jersey District Court Jan. 25, Nike called Global Heartbreak founder Naadier Riles a “bootlegger” (pun intended?), saying the designer essentially copied its Air Jordans, and put his own logo on it. A comparison of the two shoes can be seen in the photo above.
In a new complaint filed in US District Court in New Jersey on Thursday, Nike is calling Naadier Riles, the founder of Global Heartbreak, a “bootlegger” that is allegedly infringing on its Air Jordan 1 High silhouette and outsole designs.
Nike’s complaint claims Riles didn’t even create any new design for his own sneaker. “Instead, he stole Nike’s Air Jordan 1 High design and replaced Nike’s branding with his own,” Nike wrote in the filing. “Riles does not deny that he intentionally copied Nike’s Air Jordan 1 High designs. In the last month, Riles has twice admitted that he used Nike’s federally-protected designs in order to gain brand recognition.”
In the filing, Nike said it became aware of Global Heartbreak and the alleged infringing products through a video published by ReasonTV in December last year. Nike says it sent a cease and desist letter Jan. 3, demanding Global Heartbreak stop selling the product, and requested information on how many of the items were already sold, as well as any revenue generated.
Instead of answering the letter, Nike claims Riles went onto social media to complain about the letter. “On Jan. 5, 2024, Riles posted the letter to his Instagram [@naadyglo], stating ‘this is what I had to do to get this recognition that I deserved,’” the complaint said. TLL was unable to verify that statement, because the Instagram is private and couldn’t be accessed.
However, Riles did follow up by calling Nike’s legal counsel, which resulted in a short phone call that ended up pouring more fuel on the fire.
Nike says its legal counsel explained what was required to reach an amicable settlement to the dispute, but that Riles allegedly recorded the conversation illegally and then posted it to his Instagram and Twitter accounts.
While Nike insists the recording is illegal, TLL has found that it is legal in New Jersey for a person to record a phone call without the other party’s knowledge or consent, a legal proposition known as Single Party Consent. There are only 10 states that don’t allow single party consent recording, and New Jersey is not among those states.
In any case, Nike Riley did provide some information as the parties attempted to resolve the dispute, including the name and contact information for his manufacturer of illegal knockoffs of Nike’s Air Jordan 1 design, the amount of knockoffs sold, and the amount of knockoffs remaining in inventory Jan. 20.
Finally, on Jan. 24, Nike said it “provided Riles with an opportunity to walk away from this dispute.” Specifically, Nike said in the filing that it asked Riles to provide an assurance that he would stop using Nike’s iconic designs and inform his followers that he would be discontinuing the infringing products.
“The same day, rather than respond to Nike’s attempt to resolve the dispute amicably, Riles again took to social media and publicly threatened Nike with the release of additional infringing sneakers in a continued attempt to capitalize off of his infringement to build additional brand recognition,” the complaint stated.
As a result, Nike has filed suit and is seeking an award of three times the amount of compensatory damages and increased profits that Riles may have gained from selling his alleged infringing sneakers.
No hearing date has yet been set.
SAG-AFTRA Calling for Ban on Deep Fake Porn After Taylor Swift Targeted by AI