Delulu for Labubu: What IP protection exists for its likeness?

Social media influencers have added to the hype and status of the toy by unveiling blind box purchases on social media networks. As a result, Labubu toys have gained mass popularity and are being traded as commodities of considerable commercial value.
This frenzy has naturally attracted a slew of global intellectual property infringements with many misusing the image and likeness of the Labubu toys and some even producing counterfeit dolls.
Unless you are a trade mark boffin, it may be somewhat perplexing how the image and likeness of an inanimate and fictional creature can be deserving of protection in terms of the law. Plainly stated, the design of the toys, which includes the look and feel, are eligible for protection.
In South Africa, that protection includes, in particular, the reputation and goodwill that the owner of the toys has acquired in the design of the toys, which incorporates its likeness or imagery. The unauthorised use of the design of the toy in trade will likely create a misrepresentation that the user is connected in trade with the owner of the Labubu toys and the Labubu name or trade mark. The risk of harm caused by this confusion is actionable as passing-off, and may even attract a claim for damages.
The name, image and likeness of the toys are not to be confused with personality rights infringements, where personality rights are only enjoyed by humans. The misuse of the name, image or likeness (NIL) of a person, particularly a celebrity, could attract a passing-off claim and a claim for infringement of personality rights, which marks the distinction between NIL rights for inanimate characters and living people.
Indeed, the likeness of Labubu toys may also qualify for protection as a well-known trade mark to the extent that the likeness is distinctive in a trade mark sense. In other words, the likeness or image of the toy should be perceived as a badge of origin, conveying to consumers that toys or other goods reproducing or imitating that likeness emanate from the Labubu owner.
Ultimately, these collectible playthings are the subject of intellectual property rights and misusing those rights is akin to playing with fire.
About Kim Rampersadh
Kim Rampersadh is a trade mark practitioner and partner at Adams & Adams.

Related
Local trade marks v genuine imports: SCA ruling clarifies 'counterfeit' and 'infringement' 26 Jun 2025 Claws out as High Court rules on Tammy Taylor trade mark franchising dispute 23 Jun 2025 The dos and don'ts of registering a 'green' trade mark 20 Jun 2025 Smile, you're on camera: Court reaffirms virtually signed agreements still valid 2 Jun 2025 Pirate now, pay later: Long-term cost of copying textbooks 23 May 2025 AI in IP law practice: The good, the bias and the (potentially) unethical 22 May 2025