Formula One was racing into a storm tonight as an article in the Daily Telegraph by Christian Sylt revealed that Post-It Note maker 3M has officially filed opposition to the sport's application for a trademark to its own logo. It could put the brakes on the brand which has been derided by drivers and fans alike.

F1's logo was unveiled at the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix in November and was trumpeted as a flagship for F1's new era under Liberty Media which bought the sport at the start of last year. It has since been followed up with an official font, mascot and theme tune in a bid to rev up F1's image.

The previous logo had been used for 23 years and created the silhouette of a number one between a slanted letter ‘F' and the speed lines opposite. In contrast, the new logo is formed of two parts - a curved stripe with a white line running through the middle followed by a straight line. Unfortunately, it bears a striking resemblance to a logo which has been used by 3M for the past year on its Futuro range of therapeutic clothing including ankle supports, knee straps and compression tights used to prevent deep-vein thrombosis.

This put it on track for a collision with F1 as the sport launched a new line of clothing earlier this year featuring its new logo.

In January the Telegraph revealed that 3M hadn't given F1 permission to use the design and was considering what action to take. That decision has now been made as it has lodged opposition to F1's logo application with the European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) which will make a decision in the next two to four months.

Opposition to trademarks is not uncommon but this is different for several reasons. Firstly, the two logos look so similar and this is the key factor in whether the authorities will give F1's logo the green light.

F1's trademark application covers 26 of the total of 45 categories including one for clothing but excluding the one relating to therapeutic clothing which 3M's mark is registered in. However, in 2008 the European Court of Justice's Advocate General ruled that trademarks are "protected by a basic rule which prevents the registration or use of a sign identical or similar to a registered trademark, for goods or services identical or similar to those for which the mark is registered."

It means that if someone - such as F1 - wants to apply for a trademark to a logo which looks similar to one which has already been registered it won't be able to do so if. This is the second difference to many other opposition cases as the chronology is clear cut.

EUIPO records show that 3M applied for a pan-European trademark to its logo on 17 February 2017 and it was registered four months later. This gives 3M precedence as F1 didn't lodge the application for its new logo until November. It's unclear if F1 was aware of the 3M registration when it chose its new logo but one would hope it was.

F1 is now in a position where it risks being forced to drop its logo and pay to re-brand (again) if the opposition goes against it.

It could pay 3M to head this off but that would cost too... and this at a time the teams are already facing a financial hit as F1's spending under its new owners continues.

Furthermore, 3M doesn't need the money. Last year alone it made pre-tax profits of $7.5bn on $31.7bn of revenue which was 18 times higher than F1's total. The sport is now on a collision course with a giant and its very brand is at stake.

With 3M likely to stand its ground, F1 faces a bruising time ahead… and could well end up requiring the various therapeutic supports that form the Futuro range.