Unicoin has taken its trademark dispute with Uniswap Labs to the federal court, asking a New York court to declare that its UNICOIN brand and its unicorn logo do not infringe any trademarks held by the decentralized exchange and cancel Uniswap’s federal registration for the UNI▲$3.25 trademark. The complaint followed a demand letter sent in June regarding the infringement.
According to the filing, Uniswap’s lawyers on June 3 demanded that Unicoin permanently stop using the word UNICOIN and other variants with these services, transfer ownership of the domain names unicoin.com and unicoin.org, account for profits, reimburse Uniswap for the lawyer’s fees, and abandon all filings and registrations of the marks.
Unicoin rejected the requests on June 23, stating it developed its brand independently and had used UNICOIN since 2021, and that its brand is distinct from Uniswap’s trademarks UNISWAP, UNI and UNICHAIN. As further correspondence between the parties continued, Uniswap stated consumers could still be confused, and that it could seek legal remedies.
The lawsuit now seeks a judgment from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, before Uniswap brings an infringement action, by attacking U.S. Trademark Registration No. 7,307,721 for UNI, registered in February 2024 for software technology related to crypto governance.
Unicoin also claimed that “uni” was too common for Uniswap to claim exclusive use of it, as “uni” is part of the Latin word for “one” (“unus”) and thousands of trademarks exist in the U.S. for that word.
Read More: Iran Is Using Tether to Bypass Sanctions: Crypto’s Biggest Real-World Use Case Just Got Darker
It also points to other crypto projects with similar names, claiming some of them predated the launch of Uniswap’s governance token in September 2020.
Unicoin denies this, saying there is no evidence of consumer confusion and describing UNICOIN as an asset-backed cryptocurrency. Uniswap is a decentralized trading protocol, and UNI is Uniswap’s governance token.
Unicoin argues the logos are not confusingly similar, and that the two companies have marketed their products simultaneously for years without known inquiries from the public as to any affiliation.
Timing is also a part of Unicoin’s argument, as it claims that Uniswap founder Hayden Adams spoke about Unicoin in May 2024, implying that Uniswap had knowledge of the company before the filing of its first trademark demand. Unicoin considered these remarks evidence of hostility, but this has never been tested.
The conflict comes as Unicoin is defending itself against another Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit that was filed in May 2025, charging the company and several top executives with raising over $100 million through allegedly misleading and unregistered securities offerings. Unicoin denied the allegations and is appealing.
Read More: $320M Bitcoin Hack: What Really Happened to Liquid Network?
The suit by Unicoin sought declarations of non-infringement, as well as of dilution, cybersquatting and unfair competition, cancellation of the UNI registration, and attorney’s fees and costs, and a jury trial if permitted. The case also included the trademark rights to Unicoin and the registration of Uniswap’s UNI.
