PEI Licensing Files Trademark Infringement Suit Against Pudgy Penguins Over Penguin Branding

PEI Licensing, the company behind the Original Penguin apparel brand, has filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Pudgy Penguins, a crypto brand derived from an Ethereum-based NFT collection. The complaint was lodged on March 4 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

The lawsuit alleges that Pudgy Penguins’ unauthorized use and attempted registration of various penguin-related word and design trademarks violate laws protecting fair competition and trade practices. PEI Licensing contends that this conduct causes damage and irreparable injury to its goodwill and business reputation.

PEI has used a penguin design on apparel since at least 1956 and has held a penguin word mark since 1967. The company argues that Pudgy Penguins’ marks are likely to mislead, deceive, and confuse consumers into believing there is an affiliation between the two brands, which does not exist.

The complaint includes side-by-side comparisons of PEI’s apparel and headwear products with those offered by Pudgy Penguins, highlighting “immediate similarities.” It also references Pudgy Penguins’ trademark applications for phrases such as “I am my penguin and my penguin is me” and “Pengu Nation,” intended for use on goods identical or nearly identical to those covered by PEI’s existing registrations.

Pudgy Penguins launched its Ethereum NFT collection in 2021 and has since become a prominent crypto brand. It also operates a Solana-based culture coin called PENGU and has sold over $10 million worth of physical toys through major retailers like Walmart and Target within a year.

According to the suit, PEI sent Pudgy Penguins a cease-and-desist letter on October 20, 2023, and filed opposition notices against at least two Pudgy Penguins trademark applications with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in 2024. Despite these actions, Pudgy Penguins allegedly continued to use the contested marks in commerce and did not abandon its USPTO applications.

PEI asserts that Pudgy Penguins’ continued use of the marks on apparel and other products constitutes willful and intentional acts aimed at trading on PEI’s reputation and goodwill.

As remedies, PEI seeks monetary relief encompassing all profits from Pudgy Penguins’ sales of infringing items, immediate rejection of Pudgy Penguins’ trademark applications by the USPTO, and the seizure and destruction of all products bearing confusingly similar marks.

Jennifer McGlone, Chief Legal Officer of Pudgy Penguins and Igloo Inc., responded to the lawsuit, stating that the company was surprised by the legal action given ongoing productive discussions to resolve the matter privately. She emphasized that Pudgy Penguins has prevailed in advancing its trademark applications before the USPTO and remains confident that PEI’s claims lack merit.

McGlone further described the trademarks as visually distinct and serving entirely different markets and audiences, underscoring Pudgy Penguins’ position that no consumer confusion exists.

The case highlights the growing intersection of traditional trademark law and emerging crypto brands leveraging intellectual property rights in digital and physical marketplaces.