NFTs issued without trademark owners’ consent infringe their rights and constitute an act of unfair competition

29 November 2022 | Knowledge, News

NFTs may infringe trademark protection rights, as the Court of Rome has ruled in a case involving Juventus F.C., the legendary football club. This undoubtedly ground-breaking verdict will set the tone for rulings rendered in similar cases by other EU courts.

Consent of a club icon to use his image is not enough

The court dispute concerned the protection of the JUVE and JUVENTUS word marks and the word-figurative mark depicting a football shirt with black and white stripes – the traditional colours of Italy’s most successful football club.

The Blockeras platform offered for sale NFTs and other digital content related to trademarks belonging to Juventus, with the NFTs also containing the image of former Juventus footballer Chistian Vieri wearing the club shirt.

Interestingly, Blockeras obtained permission to use his image in 2024. However, the most interested party, Juventus, had not given its permission either for the use of the JUVENTUS logo or the image of the club shirt. The multiple Serie A champions considered the actions of the platform, in the form of Blockeras minting and marketing its NFT-based cards, as infringing their trademark rights and constituting an act of unfair competition.

As a result, the club filed for injunctive relief to stop Blockeras’ actions.

In the course of the proceedings, Juventus proved that a total of 529 cards depicting the footballer (not only wearing the Juventus shirt) had been sold via the platform, with Vieri’s sale proceeds totalling USD 35 796.87.

The Court of Rome: NFTs infringe Juventus’ rights

First, the Court of Rome considered the trademarks invoked by Juventus to be well known, since they concerned Italy’s most successful football club.

It further emphasised that Juventus was engaged in various merchandising activities (clothing, accessories, games), involving the use of the trademarks, carried out both online and via dedicated stores across Italy.

The Court found that the defendant company had used Juventus’ trademarks in merchandising and had done so without just cause.

Interestingly, Blockeras’ arguments that the registration of the marks did not cover NFT-related goods and services were not upheld. The Court acknowledged that the football club had actively participated in online games based on blockchain technologies, cryptocurrencies and/or NFTs.

When it comes to the authorised use of Vieri’s image, the Court held that Blockeras had been also required to obtain Juventus’ consent to use the club’s trademarks for commercial purposes.

In conclusion, the Court of Rome granted the injunctive relief, finding that Blockeras’ actions constituted an act of unfair competition.

How best to protect your brand against similar infringements

The Juventus case has proved that NFT- and Metaverse-related infringements have become a real issue. It may seem that the first cases have concerned only large, global players, but like all infringements on the Internet, such cases will soon become more widespread.

Nowadays it’s becoming clear that a failure to adequately update trademark applications and adjust the list of goods and services to their use in the virtual world may lead to a serious limitation of trademark protection in the real world.

Not long ago, the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) issued its own guidelines on virtual goods, NFTs and the Metaverse. We wrote about this in the “Well-known brands prepare to enter the Metaverse” article (https://www.kochanski.pl/en/well-known-brands-prepare-to-enter-the-metaverse/)

Find out how to effectively secure your brand for entry into the Metaverse and NFT world by contacting me directly

Tomasz Szambelan


See also:

Well-known brands prepare to enter the Metaverse

Latest Knowledge

Banking in 2026: technology, regulation and the new market landscape

The year 2026 will see the banking sector undergo its most dynamic transformation in a decade. The trends identified in Accenture’s Top Banking Trends FY26 report suggest that the sector is entering a phase in which technology and regulation will be inseparable, driving all aspects of change. However, it is regulation that determines the boundaries, pace and manner of implementation for new solutions. We take a look at what else the experts are focusing on.

The new National Cybersecurity System

The amendment to the Act on the National Cybersecurity System (UKSC) is one of the most significant regulatory reforms in recent years. Its main objective is to align Polish law with Directive (EU) 2022/2555 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The directive, also known as NIS2, substantially raises digital security requirements across the Union. The Polish Act on the National Cybersecurity System has undergone a thorough overhaul, covering more organisations (with estimates suggesting nearly 40,000 entities), introducing more demanding obligations, statutory personal liability for management board members, and even more stringent rules for imposing financial penalties. In the case of the most serious violations, these penalties can reach 100 million PLN.

‘Made in Europe’ is no longer just a slogan. It is becoming law

Until recently, ‘Made in Europe’ was just a label. While it was useful for marketing purposes, it lacked any hard, normative content. This may soon change. On 4 March, the European Commission published a proposal for the Industrial Accelerator Act, stipulating that, from 2027 onwards, the Union origin of components will be a prerequisite for participating in renewable energy auctions, accessing public funding, and for being eligible to participate in public procurement procedures. The slogan ‘Buy European’ could become a concrete instrument for supporting local production and controlling foreign investment.

Non-obvious cases of transferring an establishment to a new employer

The transfer of all or part of an establishment (zakład pracy) is a special concept in labour law relating to changes in ownership. Put simply, it is the automatic transfer of all the rights and obligations of the employer from one entity to another, without the need for any additional actions or consents from the parties involved. However, this must be preceded by the fulfilment of a range of informing obligations by both the new and former employers. Let’s take a look at what the process should involve.

Protecting yourself against tax risks in the deposit-return system

The deposit-return system has been in place since October 2025, raising significant tax concerns from the outset. Although the regulations came into force, it was unclear for a long time how to apply them in practice. Some of the regulations needed clarification, some solutions were missing and the published explanations did not cover all the key issues. Consequently, the market began to develop its own operating standards.

Banking sector overview | Banking today and tomorrow | March 2026

On 12 February 2026, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a judgment concerning the use of the WIBOR index in loan agreements. The CJEU judges confirmed that, in consumer cases, courts cannot examine the correctness of the WIBOR calculation. The banks had correctly informed their clients about the reference rate in accordance with national and EU law.

The issue of the National Labour Inspectorate reform has resurfaced

A new draft law proposing changes to the way the National Labour Inspectorate operates has been submitted to the Sejm. During its first reading on 25 February, the draft was not rejected and was therefore referred to the Social Policy and Family Committee for further consideration. Despite the concerns and controversies raised so far, including by businesses, the legislature continues to pursue the thorough modernisation of Poland’s employment model, which involves increased supervision of the labour market and curbing the abuse of civil law contracts. In this article, we will take a look at the proposals included in the new draft and explain what they mean for businesses.

Contact us:

Tomasz Szambelan

Tomasz Szambelan

Advocate / Counsel / Intellectual and Industrial Property Law

+48 608 593 042

t.szambelan@kochanski.pl