Key Takeaways
- The NFT industry faces growing legal scrutiny, with lawsuits involving major players like Nike, Hermès, and Yuga Labs revealing significant gaps in how NFT copyright, trademarks, and securities laws are understood and enforced.
- Nike’s acquisition of RTFKT led to a class-action lawsuit from investors who claim they were misled about NFT functionality and licensing, raising questions about consumer protection and metadata changes.
- High-profile cases like Hermès vs. Rothschild and Yuga Labs vs. Ryder Ripps set important precedents around trademark infringement, parody, and the limits of artistic expression in NFT collections.
- The SEC’s case against Stoner Cats classified NFTs as securities, marking a major regulatory milestone and highlighting the need for stricter compliance in NFT sales and marketing practices.
In April, a lawsuit involving Nike’s Web3 division, RTFKT, rocked the NFT space. The case is only the latest in a series of high-profile NFT lawsuits that underscore how poorly understood non-fungible tokens remain, even among the world’s most powerful brands.
The complexity of the legal issues in the NFT market ranges from copyright infringement to securities violations. NFT lawsuits offer an early glimpse into how regulators and courts might shape the future of this new technology.
According to a report by Elliptic, over $100 million in NFT-related fraud was recorded in 2022 alone, highlighting the urgent need for better legal frameworks. In this article, we’ll break down six of the most important NFT lawsuits to date and examine the novel questions they raise.
6 Most Famous NFT Lawsuits
Here are six NFT lawsuits from the past few years. Some have changed how users perceive NFTs, while others are still in court.
| Case | Year | Dispute Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Cheema vs Nike Inc (RTFKT) | 2025 | Investors were misled into buying NFTs whose value was affected by undisclosed changes |
| Hermès vs Mason Rothschild | 2023 | Hermès sued over “MetaBirkins” NFTs, claiming trademark infringement |
| Yuga Labs vs Ryder Ripps | 2023 | Yuga Labs sued Ripps for creating a near-copy NFT collection |
| Nike vs StockX | 2022 | Nike sued StockX over NFTs linked to Nike sneakers |
| SEC vs Impact Theory | 2023 | SEC charged Impact Theory with offering unregistered securities |
| SEC vs Stoner Cats | 2023 | SEC charged Stoner Cats with offering unregistered securities |
Cheema vs Nike Inc (Nike RTFKT)
- Year: 2025
Nike is one of the world’s largest and most recognizable sportswear and footwear brands, known for its innovation and global cultural impact. RTFKT (pronounced “artifact”) is a digital fashion and NFT studio that creates virtual sneakers and collectibles, specializing in merging gaming, crypto, and high-end design.
Nike acquired RTFKT in 2021 to position itself at the forefront of virtual fashion and NFT-based sneakers. However, in 2025, Jagdeep Cheema and other investors filed a class action lawsuit against Nike, alleging they had been misled into buying NFTs under false pretenses. They claim the RTFKT team, including co-founder Zaptio, did not disclose plans that materially affected the NFTs’ value, including design changes and decisions around NFT metadata and licensing.
The core legal question revolves around whether Nike and RTFKT violated consumer protection rules. The suers are asking for $5 million in damages and argue that the NFTs were marketed as investments and that undisclosed changes in their functionality and licensing rights affected their value.
As of now, the case is ongoing. Legal experts are watching closely because it could soon set a precedent for NFT metadata and marketing practices.
Hermès vs Maison Rotschild
- Year: 2023
In 2021, digital artist Mason Rothschild created “MetaBirkins,” a series of NFT artworks inspired by Hermès’ iconic Birkin bags. While the author claimed the works were artistic expression under the First Amendment, Hermès sued him for trademark infringement. The company argued that MetaBirkins misled consumers into thinking they were part of the brand.
The lawsuit raised critical questions about how trademark law applies to NFTs and virtual representations of physical products. Hermès alleged that Rothschild’s use of the Birkin name and design diluted their brand and misappropriated their intellectual property. Furthermore, the company argued that Rothschild’s NFT collection would prevent them from launching one of their own in the future.
In 2023, a jury sided with Hermès and awarded the brand $133,000 in damages. The court concluded that Rothschild’s NFTs were commercial products exploiting Hermès’ reputation and didn’t fall under protected speech. This case significantly impacted how users see copyright and trademark issues in the NFT space.
Yuga Labs vs Rider Ripps
- Year: 2023
Yuga Labs is the company behind the Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) NFT collection. In 2023, the company filed a lawsuit against artist Ryder Ripps. The reason for this was that Ripps created and sold a nearly identical collection of NFTs under the name “Ryder Ripps Bored Ape Yacht Club” (RR/BAYC). Furthermore, he claimed his project was a form of protest and satire, alleging that BAYC promoted inappropriate imagery.
In return, Yuga Labs accused Ripps of false advertising, trademark infringement, and cybersquatting. At the same time, Ripps countered by arguing that his project was an act of artistic critique, not a commercial replica. The case raised new legal questions about parody, protest art, and digital ownership.
In October 2023, a California judge ruled in favor of Yuga Labs, stating that Ripps had intentionally misled consumers and violated trademark laws. Lastly, this ruling reaffirmed that NFTs are subject to traditional trademark protections, even in cases involving claimed satire or critique.
Nike vs StockX
- Year: 2022
In 2022, StockX, a popular sneaker resale platform, launched a Vault NFT program, allowing users to trade NFTs linked to physical sneakers stored in StockX warehouses. One such NFT featured Nike sneakers, thus prompting Nike to file a lawsuit.
Nike claimed that StockX’s use of Nike-branded NFTs constituted trademark infringement. StockX countered that the NFTs were merely representations of authentic goods and fell under “first-sale doctrine” protections.
As of March 4, 2025, a judge ruled that Nike’s trademark infringement and false advertising claims must face a jury, meaning the case is now heading to trial. Nike did secure a partial win as the court granted summary judgment on its counterfeiting claim involving 37 fake sneakers. The rest of the claims remain unresolved and will be litigated further in court.
While the case has not yet gone to trial, the judge allowed Nike’s lawsuit to proceed. The court ruled that StockX’s NFTs could confuse consumers about Nike’s involvement in the project. The conclusion of this case, whatever it is, could help define the legal boundaries of NFT-linked physical products.
SEC vs Impact Theory
- Year: 2023
Based in Los Angeles, Impact Theory is a media and entertainment company founded by entrepreneur and motivational speaker Tom Bilyeu. In addition, the company produced inspirational content and branded media focused on personal development, entrepreneurship, and pop culture.
During Q4 2021, Impact Theory launched an NFT initiative called “Founder’s Keys,” promoting it as a way for supporters to invest in what it described as “the next Disney.” In 2023, the U.S. SEC charged the company with conducting an unregistered offering of securities. It said that the project promoted its NFTs as investment opportunities tied to the success of the business.
The SEC ruled that the NFTs qualified as securities. Without admitting or denying the charges, Impact Theory agreed to pay more than $6.1 million in fines. This case established that NFTs can be securities, setting a critical precedent for future enforcement in the space.
SEC vs Stoner Cats
- Year: 2023
Stoner Cats was a celebrity-backed NFT project that funded an animated web series starring major Hollywood talent. Some of the voice actors included Mila Kunis, Jane Fonda, Ashton Kutcher, Seth MacFarlane, Chris Rock, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Butherin, and others. In 2021, the project released an NFT collection of 10,000 and raised more than $8 million.
Buyers of the NFTs were promised exclusive access to episodes and other perks. However, in 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) charged the creators with offering unregistered securities. The SEC alleged that the project promoted the NFTs as investments that would gain value over time. Consequently, this classified them as securities under the Howey Test.
Stoner Cats agreed to stop offering its NFTs and pay a $1 million penalty, without admitting or denying the SEC’s allegations. Additionally, according to the SEC, the project agreed to destroy all NFTs it still holds and publish a notice about the order on its website and social media.
This was another case that classified NFTs as securities, signaling increased regulatory scrutiny. Finally, the lawsuit led to the cancellation of the show.
Closing Thoughts
These six cases illustrate the wide range of legal issues that can arise in the NFT industry, from copyright disputes and trademark infringement to securities regulation and consumer fraud. They reveal just how complex and untested many aspects of NFT law remain. NFTs are unique digital assets, but the legal principles governing their use and sale are still evolving.
Moreover, these lawsuits also highlight critical points of vulnerability in NFT infrastructure. Issues like metadata mutability, vague licensing terms, and speculative marketing play significant roles in courts interpreting the rights and responsibilities of NFT creators and buyers. As regulators focus on NFT projects, compliance will become more essential than ever.
