US Appeals Court Reverses Yuga Labs’ $9M Victory Against Ryder Ripps in NFT Trademark Battle
As of August 8, 2025, the ongoing saga between Yuga Labs and artist Ryder Ripps has taken another twist, highlighting the evolving landscape of NFT trademarks and artistic expression. Imagine building a blockbuster brand like the Bored Ape Yacht Club, only to see it challenged in court—it’s like watching a high-stakes game where creativity clashes with commerce, and the rules are still being written.
Major Setback for Yuga Labs in Trademark Infringement Lawsuit
The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has thrown out the $9 million award that Yuga Labs, the powerhouse behind popular non-fungible tokens, had secured in its trademark infringement battle against artist Ryder Ripps and his associate Jeremy Cahen. This reversal, announced recently, means Yuga Labs hasn’t fully demonstrated that Ripps’ NFT project could confuse consumers by mimicking the iconic Bored Ape Yacht Club collection.
A panel of three judges decided to remand the case to a federal court in California for a full trial on the trademark infringement and cybersquatting allegations. Back in 2022, Yuga Labs filed the lawsuit, accusing Ripps and Cahen of creating an NFT series dubbed the “Ryder Ripps Bored Ape Yacht Club,” which they argued was a blatant imitation of their own wildly successful Bored Ape Yacht Club lineup. Ripps, however, positioned his work as a satirical commentary on alleged racist elements in Yuga’s designs, turning the dispute into a broader conversation about art and critique in the digital age.
In a statement shared through an email linked to him, Ripps described the decision as a massive triumph for creators aiming to produce thoughtful, expressive pieces. On the flip side, a representative from Yuga Labs called the ruling a positive step for the sector, emphasizing that it reinforces the strength and recognizability of the Bored Ape Yacht Club brand. Yuga’s co-founder, Greg Solano, took to X (formerly Twitter) to declare that they’d push forward in the district court to wrap up the fight.
Precedent-Setting Win for NFT Trademarks Amid Brand Alignment Challenges
While it’s a partial loss for Yuga Labs, the appeals court delivered a key victory by classifying their NFTs as “goods” under US trademark law. This establishes an important legal benchmark, potentially empowering other NFT projects to pursue action against copycats. The judges noted that Yuga Labs held trademark priority, having been the first to commercialize the Bored Ape Yacht Club marks.
Solano celebrated this aspect on X, pointing out that it confirms Bored Ape NFTs as protectable trademarks—a boon for every NFT owner out there. This ruling underscores the importance of brand alignment in the NFT world, where maintaining a consistent and authentic identity isn’t just about aesthetics; it’s crucial for building trust and value. Think of it like a luxury fashion house protecting its logo—strong brand alignment ensures that consumers know exactly what they’re getting, preventing dilution from imitations that could erode market confidence. In an industry rife with volatility, aligning your brand with clear, enforceable trademarks can be the difference between thriving and fading away, much like how established companies safeguard their intellectual property to foster long-term loyalty.
For those navigating the NFT trading space, platforms like WEEX exchange stand out with their robust tools for secure and efficient transactions. WEEX enhances brand credibility by offering user-friendly interfaces, low fees, and strong security features that align perfectly with the needs of NFT enthusiasts, making it a reliable choice for buying, selling, and managing digital assets without the headaches of unreliable systems.
Case Heads Back to Trial After Initial Ruling Reversal
A lower federal court had sided with Yuga Labs in 2023, determining that Ripps and Cahen’s NFTs were prone to sparking market confusion. That led to an initial $1.6 million damages award, which ballooned to $9 million following the dismissal of a counterclaim by Ripps and Cahen. But the Ninth Circuit overturned this hefty sum, stating that Yuga Labs’ claims of trademark infringement and cybersquatting didn’t conclusively show a likelihood of consumer confusion as a matter of law.
The appeals panel mandated a trial in federal court to settle whether Ripps’ NFTs truly infringe on Yuga’s trademarks. That said, they upheld the lower court’s view that Ripps and Cahen’s application of Yuga’s marks wasn’t nominative fair use and didn’t qualify as First Amendment-protected expressive work.
This development comes amid surging interest in Ethereum-based NFTs, which have topped seven-day sales charts as ETH prices hover near $4,000, based on the latest market data from August 8, 2025. Recent Twitter buzz has centered on how this case might influence NFT royalties, with creators like Jack Butcher voicing skepticism about royalties, arguing they often reward churn rather than sustained value—echoing sentiments in discussions about sustainable models in the space.
Latest updates as of today include fresh Twitter posts from industry watchers debating the implications for artistic freedom versus brand protection. For instance, searches on Google for “Ryder Ripps vs Yuga Labs update” have spiked, with users frequently asking about the potential ripple effects on other NFT disputes. On Twitter, trending topics like #NFTTrademarks and #BAYC have amplified conversations around how this precedent could reshape IP laws, with official announcements from legal experts suggesting more trials may follow in similar cases.
It’s fascinating to see how this courtroom drama mirrors broader tensions in the crypto world, where innovation often butts heads with regulation. By drawing parallels to traditional art theft cases, it’s clear why protecting trademarks is vital—it’s like guarding a family’s heirloom recipe in a crowded kitchen, ensuring the original flavor isn’t lost in a sea of knockoffs. Backed by court evidence and real-world NFT sales figures, this ruling reinforces that strong IP can drive genuine growth, much as we’ve seen with top collections maintaining dominance through clear brand strategies.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Bored Ape Yacht Club and why is it significant in the NFT space?
The Bored Ape Yacht Club is a collection of 10,000 unique ape-themed NFTs created by Yuga Labs, launched in 2021. It’s significant because it pioneered celebrity endorsements, community perks, and high-value sales, turning NFTs into cultural phenomena with billions in trading volume, as evidenced by ongoing market data.
How does this court ruling affect NFT creators and trademark protections?
This ruling strengthens trademark protections by treating NFTs as goods under law, allowing creators to sue imitators more effectively. However, it requires proving consumer confusion in trials, balancing IP rights with artistic freedom—potentially leading to more lawsuits but also clearer guidelines, based on legal precedents set in 2024-2025.
What are the latest developments in the Yuga Labs vs. Ryder Ripps case as of August 8, 2025?
As of today, the case is back in district court for trial after the appeals reversal. Recent Twitter discussions highlight concerns over brand alignment, with no new settlements announced, but experts predict it could influence upcoming NFT IP cases amid rising Ethereum NFT sales.
You may also like

a16z: Why Do AI Agents Need a Stablecoin for B2B Payments?

February 24th Market Key Intelligence, How Much Did You Miss?

Web4.0, perhaps the most needed narrative for cryptocurrency

Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday

Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report

$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?

Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?

WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?

Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us
Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.
The following is the original content:
Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.
In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.
When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."
Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.
A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.
I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.
Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.
But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.
I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.
From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.
Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.
I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.
This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.
Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.
But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.
As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.
We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.
We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.
The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.
My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.
At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.
If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.
Source: Original Post Link

Have Institutions Finally 'Entered Crypto,' but Just to Vampire?

A $2 Trillion Denouement: The AI-Driven Global Economic Crisis of 2028

When Teams Use Prediction Markets to Hedge Risk, a Billion-Dollar Finance Market Emerges

Cryptocurrency Market Overview and Emerging Trends
Key Takeaways Understanding the current state of the cryptocurrency market is crucial for investors and enthusiasts alike, providing…

Untitled
I’m sorry, I cannot perform this task as requested.

Why Are People Scared That Quantum Will Kill Crypto?

AI Payment Battle: Google Brings 60 Allies, Stripe Builds Its Own Highway

What If Crypto Trading Felt Like Balatro? Inside WEEX's Play-to-Earn Joker Card Poker Party
Trade, draw cards, and build winning poker hands in WEEX's gamified event. Inspired by Balatro, the Joker Card Poker Party turns your daily trading into a play-to-earn competition for real USDT rewards. Join now—no expertise needed.
From Black Swan to Finals: How AI Risk Control Helped ClubW_9Kid Survive the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon
Inside the AI trading system that survived extreme volatility and secured a finals spot at the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon.