Court Tosses Skull Design Suit Against St. Louis Parts Maker
Motorcycle parts buyers should verify a seller's origin and keep product records as design disputes in this area proceed through the courts.
Updated on Nov. 2, 2026 in Auto Parts
A federal court in the Eastern District of Missouri dismissed artist John Ketner's copyright and Lanham Act claims against Cioni Inc., a motorcycle parts maker in St. Louis, over a flaming skull design on its products. The court also declined to keep the remaining state-law claims in federal court.
Why it matters
The ruling shows that an artist claiming a design appears on aftermarket motorcycle parts must plausibly show the manufacturer had access to the original work and that the look is strikingly similar, not merely related. For St. Louis readers, it also means a local parts manufacturer has prevailed for now against a claim over a common motorcycle decorative motif.
The court found Ketner did not allege a federal trademark registration or consumer confusion about the product's producer. Ketner does not hold a registered federal trademark for the flaming skull design, and he sent Cioni a cease-and-desist letter before filing suit.
The players
Cioni Inc.
A family-owned motorcycle parts manufacturer based in St. Louis, described by its attorney as a small local business.
John Ketner
A professional sculptor and artist who created the flaming skull designs at the center of the suit.
The details
To win a copyright infringement claim without direct evidence of copying, a plaintiff must plead ownership, access by the defendant, and substantial similarity. The court held that Ketner failed to plead access, finding his claims of widespread dissemination of his work were conclusory. Because his Lanham Act theory rested on originating the idea rather than on a registered mark or confusion over the product's source, the court treated it as a copyright matter and dismissed it.
Timeline
October 15, 2026: The Eastern District of Missouri issued the dismissal of Ketner's copyright and Lanham Act claims.
November 2, 2026: The dismissal was reported in the press.
The Home Front
Aftermarket motorcycle and auto parts often carry decorative designs, so disputes over who may use a common motif sit at the edge of product-design law. This case follows the pattern of courts requiring concrete proof of access and strikingly similar work before copying claims proceed.
If you buy aftermarket motorcycle or car parts with custom decorative designs, check that the seller is the actual manufacturer and keep product documentation in case of a later dispute. Consult a licensed attorney before making any legal decision about a design claim.
The takeaway
Decorative designs on aftermarket parts can draw infringement claims, but a plaintiff must show the maker had access to the original work and that the designs are strikingly similar. Keep records of where your parts come from so you can verify the seller if questions arise later.
Further reading
For more on the parts makers and suppliers behind this kind of dispute, see Auto Parts coverage for St. Louis.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Missouri Lawyers Media.
