Canadian athletic apparel giant Lululemon Athletica has launched a high-profile lawsuit against Costco Wholesale Corp., alleging that the retail behemoth is selling “dupes”—or near-identical copies—of some of its most iconic products. The legal action, filed June 27 in a California federal court, marks the latest clash between premium brands and mass-market retailers over the booming market for lookalike goods.

The Allegations

Lululemon claims that Costco is infringing on its intellectual property by selling apparel that copies the design and trade dress of the brand’s popular Scuba hoodies, Define jackets, and ABC pants. According to the complaint, these alleged knockoffs are sold under Costco’s own Kirkland Signature label as well as through other manufacturers like Danskin, Jockey, and Spyder.

The lawsuit contends that these products violate Lululemon’s patents and trademarks, and that their similarity is likely to mislead consumers—either into believing they are purchasing authentic Lululemon items or into deliberately choosing dupes that are difficult to distinguish from the originals. “Some customers incorrectly believe these infringing products are authentic Lululemon apparel while still other customers specifically purchase the infringing products because they are difficult to distinguish from authentic Lululemon products,” the lawsuit states.

Lululemon’s Response and Demands

Lululemon asserts that it attempted to resolve the issue by sending cease and desist letters to Costco, but resorted to litigation after those efforts failed. The company is seeking:

• A court injunction to stop Costco from manufacturing, importing, marketing, and selling the alleged dupes

• Monetary damages to cover lost profits

• Removal of advertising for the disputed products from Costco’s online and print platforms

• A jury trial to decide the matter

A Lululemon spokesperson emphasized, “We take the responsibility of safeguarding and enforcing our intellectual property rights with utmost seriousness and will pursue legal avenues when necessary”.

The Broader Context: The Rise of “Dupes”

The lawsuit comes amid a surge in the popularity of “dupes”—lower-cost alternatives that mimic the look and feel of premium brands. With inflation and global trade tensions squeezing household budgets, many consumers have turned to these products, which are widely promoted on social media as savvy substitutes for high-priced originals. Lululemon, whose products command premium prices, has become a frequent target for this trend.

Costco’s Position

As of publication, Costco has not issued a public response to the lawsuit and has yet to file a formal legal reply. The retailer’s Kirkland brand is well-known for offering quality alternatives to name brands, but this case could test the boundaries of how closely a private label can mimic a luxury competitor.

What’s Next?

The case, officially titled Lululemon Athletica Canada Inc. v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, No. 2:25-cv-05864), is being closely watched by both the retail and legal communities. The outcome could have significant implications for how brands protect their designs—and how retailers respond to the growing demand for affordable alternatives.

For now, the legal battle underscores the high stakes in the world of brand identity, consumer perception, and the ever-blurring line between inspiration and imitation in fashion retail.

For the latest updates on industry news, follow BusinessTakeout.com.