Van Leeuwen Trade Dress Lawsuit: When Packaging Becomes Protectable

When most people think about trademark infringement, they picture someone copying a company name or logo.

The Van Leeuwen trade dress lawsuit shows that trademarks can extend much further. Sometimes, consumers recognize a product long before they read the label. The shape, colors, typography, and overall presentation of a package can become so closely associated with one business that they function as a trademark in their own right.

That idea was at the center of Van Leeuwen Ice Cream's lawsuit against Rebel Creamery. After years of litigation, a federal court concluded that Rebel had infringed Van Leeuwen's trade dress and ordered the company to turn over approximately $23.8 million in profits. The decision is one of the clearest recent examples of how valuable packaging can become when it develops source-identifying significance.

What Started the Van Leeuwen Trade Dress Lawsuit?

Van Leeuwen filed its lawsuit in 2021, arguing that Rebel Creamery had copied the distinctive appearance of its premium ice cream pints. The company was not claiming ownership over pastel colors or minimalist packaging by themselves. Instead, it argued that the overall appearance of its products had become recognizable to consumers through years of consistent use.

According to the complaint, Van Leeuwen spent more than a year working with the internationally recognized branding agency Pentagram to develop its current packaging. The finished design features monochromatic pints and matching lids, soft pastel colors, large black script lettering, and minimal text on the front of each container. The company alleged that this redesign helped increase sales by nearly fifty percent within its first six months of use and became one of its strongest brand identifiers.

Van Leeuwen further alleged that Rebel adopted nearly every significant design element of its packaging, creating products that looked strikingly similar on grocery store shelves. The complaint even described situations where retailers and consumers confused the two brands because of their packaging.

The Case Was Never About Owning a Color

One of the easiest ways to misunderstand this lawsuit is to assume Van Leeuwen was trying to stop competitors from using pastel-colored packaging.

That was never the issue.

Trademark law generally does not allow businesses to claim exclusive rights over ordinary colors or common design elements. Instead, courts examine whether the overall commercial impression created by those elements identifies a single source in the minds of consumers.

Think about it this way. Plenty of coffee shops use black-and-white branding. Plenty of athletic brands use bold typography. Individually, those design choices are fairly common. But when the same combination of colors, layout, typography, spacing, and presentation is used consistently over time, consumers may begin to recognize it as belonging to one particular company.

That overall appearance is known as trade dress.

If you're wondering how trade dress differs from a traditional trademark, we've explained the distinction in our article on Trade Dress Infringement vs. Trademark Infringement, where we discuss how the law protects more than just names and logos.

What About the Colors?

The Van Leeuwen case also raises another question we hear fairly often:

Can a company trademark a color?

The answer is yes, but only under certain circumstances.

A color does not become protectable simply because a business likes using it. Instead, the color must serve as a source identifier rather than merely decorating the product. Courts also examine whether granting exclusive rights would unfairly limit competition within the industry.

That is why this lawsuit was not about pastel colors alone. Van Leeuwen argued that consumers recognized the complete presentation of its packaging, not simply the colors themselves.

If you'd like to learn more about when colors qualify for trademark protection, we've covered that topic in greater detail in our article on whether you can trademark a color.

Why the Court Ruled for Van Leeuwen

Following a bench trial, the court concluded that Rebel's packaging created a likelihood of consumer confusion and that Rebel had intentionally copied Van Leeuwen's distinctive presentation. Reuters also reported that the court rejected portions of Rebel's explanation for how it developed its packaging, finding parts of that testimony lacked credibility.

As a result, the court ordered Rebel to stop using the infringing packaging and awarded Van Leeuwen approximately $23.8 million in profits generated from the infringing products.

While that figure certainly grabbed headlines, the broader lesson is even more significant. The decision reinforces that courts are willing to protect packaging when it functions as an indicator of source, just as they would protect a company's name or logo.

Why This Matters for Your Business

Many businesses invest heavily in creating packaging that stands out on a crowded shelf. Over time, customers begin to recognize those visual cues almost instinctively. In many cases, they identify the product before they ever read its name.

That recognition has value.

If your packaging has become synonymous with your business, it may be entitled to legal protection. On the other hand, if you're launching a new product, it's worth evaluating whether your packaging resembles a competitor's closely enough to create confusion. The goal isn't simply to avoid copying a logo — it's to avoid creating the impression that your products come from someone else.

The Van Leeuwen decision reminds businesses that branding is about the complete customer experience. Your name matters, but so does the way your products look when consumers encounter them for the first time.

Final Thoughts

The Van Leeuwen trade dress lawsuit demonstrates that intellectual property is not limited to names, slogans, and logos. Packaging itself can become one of a company's most valuable assets when consumers associate its overall appearance with a single source.

As your business grows, protecting that identity becomes just as important as building it. Whether you're developing a new product or refreshing an existing one, understanding the difference between trademarks, trade dress, and other forms of brand protection can help you avoid costly disputes, and preserve the goodwill you've worked hard to earn.