When a FIFA World Cup approaches, Brazilians traditionally show their support for the national team by wearing the national colors. Green, yellow, blue and white spread across the country and across the wardrobes of fans. Some wear the official jersey, known affectionately as the “Amarelinha”; others improvise their team spirit with any green and yellow shirt they happen to own.
As always, companies and advertising agencies look to promote brands and products by tapping into this atmosphere of national enthusiasm, which this time will stretch from the FIFA World Cup 2026, about to begin in the United States, Canada and Mexico, all the way to the FIFA Women’s World Cup 2027, to be hosted by Brazil. When it comes to advertising and intellectual property during major sporting events, however, there is no room for improvisation, even when the subject is national colors and the uniform of the Brazilian national football team.
Before launching a campaign that involves the country’s colors, whether by changing a logo to green and yellow or producing a commercial featuring actors dressed in those colors, advertisers must learn to distinguish what is effectively protected, or held exclusively by someone such as the CBF, from what belongs to Brazilian cultural heritage and is therefore free for use. Failing to draw this line creates real exposure to the infringement of intellectual property rights and to unfair competition claims.
What actually protects the Brazilian national team jersey
The legal protection of the Brazilian national team’s visual identity combines two regulatory layers.
The first is the Pelé Law (Law No. 9,615/1998), whose Article 87 grants sports governing bodies, in the case of football the Brazilian Football Confederation (CBF), exclusive ownership of the names and symbols that identify them, valid throughout the national territory for an indefinite period and without the need for registration with the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (INPI). This provision remains in force even after the enactment of the General Sports Law (Law No. 14,597/2023). In practice, the CBF crest, the name “Seleção Brasileira”, the nickname “Canarinho” and the entity’s other distinctive signs enjoy automatic legal protection.
The CBF Statute is also worth noting. Its Article 13 defines the official colors of the national team’s uniform (yellow, green, blue and white), inspired by the national flag, and likewise describes the CBF emblem.
The second layer is the Industrial Property Law (Law No. 9,279/1996), which provides additional protection to signs that the CBF chooses to register as trademarks at INPI, stacking on top of the Pelé Law protection.
Given this framework, the crest, the name and the visual identity of the national team are protected. The colors themselves, taken in isolation, are not.
Trade dress: what it is and how it applies to the jersey
Trade dress, sometimes referred to in Brazilian doctrine as conjunto-imagem, is the combination of visual and sensory elements that give a product, service or establishment a distinctive identity. Although Brazilian Industrial Property Law does not expressly regulate trade dress, the concept is recognized by case law and protected through the unfair competition framework, on the basis of Article 195, item III, and Article 209 of the Industrial Property Law.
In its Bulletin No. 715, Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice (STJ) consolidated the requirements for finding a trade dress violation:
- Absence of a purely functional character in the visual elements
- Sufficient distinctiveness of the overall combination
- Prior use by the rights holder
- Likelihood of confusion or undue association with a competing product
Applied to the Brazilian national team’s jersey, these requirements suggest that the combination of predominant yellow, green collar and trim, the CBF crest and specific graphic features, along with the particular arrangement of these elements, may indeed form a recognizable and protectable trade dress. The colors on their own, stripped from the combination that makes them distinctive, cannot be individually appropriated.
Why green and yellow, on their own, belong to no one
The question of common color combinations was addressed by the STJ in the Tratex v. Neutrox case (Special Appeal No. 1,726,804-RJ, decided in 2022). J&F, the owner of the Neutrox brand, argued that Tratex’s yellow-and-red packaging mimicked its trade dress. The Third Panel ruled, however, that color combinations that are common in a given segment, used for decades by multiple brands, do not create a right of exclusive use. The court also applied the civil law doctrine of supressio, under which a rights holder’s prolonged silence creates a presumption of waiver of the right to exclusivity.
The same reasoning applies straightforwardly to green and yellow. These colors appear on the national flag and have been used for more than a century in civic, sporting and commercial expressions throughout Brazil. The yellow national team jersey itself originated from a public design competition held after the 1950 World Cup, precisely in order to incorporate the colors of the Brazilian flag. There is no constitutional or statutory rule in Brazilian law that ties these colors to any particular entity.
Where the real risk lies for advertisers
A proper analysis of the legal boundaries requires separating what is free to use from what is restricted. In general, the risks for companies and agencies cluster around three flashpoints.
First, the use of the CBF crest, even in a stylized or partially altered form. State courts have recognized counterfeiting even when modifications are superficial, relying on Article 87 of the Pelé Law and Article 130 of the Industrial Property Law. Brazilian case law treats the signs identifying the national team as well-known marks, which strengthens their protection.
Second, the imitation of the jersey’s specific trade dress, combining the dominant color, layout of design elements, collar, symbols and typography in a manner that triggers an immediate association with the official uniform. The risk here lies not in the use of the color yellow, but in constructing a trade dress that reproduces or substantially imitates the uniform of the Brazilian national football team. Analogous reasoning appeared in the Jackzinho v. Jack Daniel’s dispute, where the central issue was the subtle reproduction of features identifying a well-established brand.
Third, the improper association with FIFA symbols, including the tournament name, mascot, trophy, official slogans and hashtags. This is the territory of ambush marketing, which remains highly sensitive as the tournaments approach.
2026 and the 2027 Women’s World Cup: distinct legal regimes
The 2026 FIFA World Cup will be hosted by the United States, Canada and Mexico. Because the tournament takes place outside Brazilian territory, Brazil’s special legislation on the protection of mega sporting events does not apply directly. The relevant anti-ambush protections will be those of the host countries, combined with the rights derived from trademarks that FIFA has registered with INPI in Brazil.
The FIFA Women’s World Cup 2027, in turn, will be hosted by Brazil in eight cities between June and July 2027. For this event, Provisional Measure No. 1,335/2026, published on January 23, 2026, sets out measures on the special protection of intellectual property and of media and marketing rights related to the FIFA Women’s World Cup 2027, establishing a special protection regime inspired by the framework adopted for the 2014 World Cup. Article 2, item XIX, of the measure defines the intellectual property of the official events broadly, encompassing any trademarks, designs, names, designations, identifying symbols, logos, mascots, emblems, slogans, trophies and other artistic representations connected to the competition, all owned by FIFA and subject to enhanced protection during the period of the tournament.
In addition, Provisional Measure No. 1,335/2026 temporarily grants well-known mark (alto renome) status to FIFA’s trademarks that consist of the entity’s official symbols, such as the FIFA emblem, the emblems of the Women’s World Cup and of other official events, the official mascots and any other official symbols indicated by FIFA. Under the measure, this status is recognized by INPI and remains effective until December 31, 2027.
Complementarily, INPI has issued Normative Order No. 58 of February 2026, setting out internal procedures for the special protection of trademarks and industrial designs related to the FIFA Women’s World Cup 2027. Companies planning campaigns aimed at the 2027 tournament should already factor this stricter regulatory environment into their decisions.
Best practices for companies and agencies
To embrace the World Cup atmosphere without triggering unfair competition claims or infringing rights held by the CBF and FIFA, companies and agencies should consider the following:
- Use Brazil’s national colors freely, but avoid combinations that reproduce or substantially imitate the official jersey’s trade dress, particularly the yellow-and-green pattern paired with elements that evoke the CBF crest or the team’s design
- Do not reproduce the CBF crest, the team name, official nicknames or related trademarks, even in stylized or partially modified form
- Monitor regulatory updates closely, especially those related to the 2027 Women’s World Cup and INPI’s normative orders
- Submit campaigns to prior legal review, including graphic materials, packaging, advertising pieces and social media activations
Our team at Ricci Intellectual Property has been advising on trademark, trade dress and unfair competition disputes for more than three decades, with consulting and litigation experience across all market segments. To guide campaigns connected to the 2026 World Cup, the 2027 Women’s World Cup or other major sporting events, foreign companies and their Brazilian subsidiaries are welcome to contact our specialists.
