Why Trade Dress Matters: Lessons from VP Racing’s Utility Jug Lawsuit
In January 2026, VP Racing Fuels, Inc. and its affiliate Plastic Product Formers, Inc. (PPF) filed a federal lawsuit seeking to protect the distinctive trade dress and intellectual property associated with its “Utility Jug” container — a product that has become iconic in motorsports and outdoor enthusiast circles.
What Is Trade Dress? A Quick Refresher
Trade dress refers to the visual appearance of a product or its packaging that signifies source and brand identity to consumers. It can include the shape, color, graphics, and overall look of the item — if those features function as source identifiers and are non‑functional. This means the visual design must signal the brand rather than provide a functional advantage.
Unlike patents — which protect functional inventions for a limited time — trade dress protection can last indefinitely if the design continues to serve as a brand marker and remains enforceable.
What Happened: VP Racing vs. Alleged Copycats
According to VP Racing’s press release, the company filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging infringement of its Utility Jug’s trade dress and other intellectual property rights. The suit targets a competitor (identified in filings as Semco, per the press notice) for copying the distinctive look and branding of VP’s jugs.
The Utility Jug isn’t just any container — it’s a recognizable item in motorsport and outdoor communities, recognizable by its size, shape, and branded elements. VP Racing claims this look has significant goodwill attached to it, making imitators harmful to their brand and confusing to consumers.
Brand Protection Stakes for Trade Dress Holders
1. Consumer Confusion Is the Core Risk: At the heart of any trade dress claim is whether the allegedly infringing product causes consumer confusion — i.e., the buyer might think they’re getting a genuine VP Racing product when they are not.
In sectors like motorsports or specialty tools where performance and reliability are key, this kind of confusion doesn’t just dilute brand value — it can damage trust and even safety perceptions.
2. Enforcement Demonstrates Market Differentiation: Taking legal action — from cease‑and‑desist letters to federal lawsuits — signals to the market that a brand seriously values its identity. This isn’t just a legal maneuver; it’s a strategic enforcement of brand equity. Brands with strong enforcement histories tend to retain higher perceived value, and courts often view active protection favorably when assessing damages or injunctive relief.
3. Documentation Is Everything: To prevail in a trade dress infringement claim, you need documented evidence of distinctiveness, secondary meaning, copying, and consumer confusion.
4. Platform and Marketplace Enforcement: Trade dress infringement today often shows up first online: e‑commerce knockoffs, third‑party marketplace copycats, and unlicensed branded containers or accessories.
Brands should leverage tools like Amazon Brand Registry, eBay Verified Rights Owner (VeRO), and Alibaba IPP to flag and remove infringing listings quickly — often before resorting to litigation.
Practical Steps for Brand Owners
1. Register & Record Your Rights: Even though trade dress can exist without registration, having a federal trademark registration fortifies your claim and strengthens enforcement options.
2. Monitor Continuously: Use digital monitoring and image recognition tools to find unauthorized uses of your trade dress online and offline.
3. Act Decisively and Consistently: Failure to enforce can weaken your rights over time. Establish a clear enforcement policy and checklist so your legal and brand teams are aligned on when to escalate.
Closing Thoughts
The VP Racing Utility Jug lawsuit highlights a core truth for brands: if your product’s look signals quality and identity to customers, it’s worth protecting.
Trade dress infringement isn’t just about copying a product — it’s about copying trust. And in today’s crowded digital marketplace, preserving that trust through vigilant protection of distinctive brand assets isn’t optional — it’s essential.
