The case began in 2001, when Adidas sued Payless for infringing certain versions of its Superstar brand shoes. Over time, the lawsuit expanded to include 268 styles of shoes sold by Payless, 53 of which adidas claimed also violated the shoes’ trade dress.

This week the jury in the case backed adidas over seven of its claims, including trade mark infringement, trade dress infringement, dilution and unfair competition.

A statement released by Collective Brands, the holding company of Payless ShoeSource, Stride Rite and Collective Licensing International, said: The Company is reviewing the verdict and assessing its impact. The Company believes that the verdict was excessive and unjustified. The Company will ask the court to set aside the verdict and, if it is not granted, intends to take all necessary steps to overturn it.”

But Charlie Henn of Kilpatrick Stockton, who represented adidas in the case, said that the amount was fair: “The parties had the opportunity to present their cases over a month-long trial and all awards were clearly justified,” he said. Henn added that, since Payless’ revenues from the sale of the shoes since 2001 totaled $393 million, a total award of $304 million could not be dubbed “excessive”.

The jury decision could have important implications for other discount retail stores as well: “The jury sent a clear message that if you’re in the business of knocking off products that are brandable under the trade mark laws, you have to stop what you’re doing,” said Henn.

adidas plans to file a claim for wilful infringement during post-trial motions, which could potentially result in an award of treble damages for the company.