Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	10. Contingencies In July 2013, Signature Apparel Group LLC, referred to as Signature, filed an amended complaint in an adversary proceeding captioned Signature Apparel Group LLC v. ROC Fashions, LLC, et al., United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Adv. Pro. No. 11-02800 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York that, among others, named Studio IP Holdings LLC (“Studio IP”) and the Company (the Company and Studio IP, collectively referred to as “Iconix”), as defendants. The causes of action in the amended complaint relate to a series of events from September 2009 with respect to which Signature sought at least $8.8 million in damages from Iconix. In August 2017, the Bankruptcy Court rendered a decision in this matter. In that decision, the Court found that one of Signature’s principals must disgorge $2.05 million of the consulting fees that he received in breach of his fiduciary duties to Signature and that Iconix was jointly and severally liable for this amount, plus interest as applicable. The Court also found Iconix liable on the causes of action asserted against it in the amended complaint, including negligent misrepresentation, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract (Studio IP only), fraud, and tortious interference with contract (the Company only). The Court ordered supplemental post-trial briefing related solely to the calculation of additional damages, if any, to be awarded to Signature. Signature, through its brief filed on November 3, 2017, now alleges damages of up to $70 million, plus counsel fees and interest as applicable. Iconix strongly disagrees with the basis for and the amounts of damages claimed by Signature and, in its responsive brief filed on December 8, 2017, argued vigorously that no additional damages are warranted. However, given the uncertainty of how the Bankruptcy Court will rule with respect to damages, Iconix cannot, at this time, estimate the amount of additional damages, if any. In April 2016, New Rise Brands Holdings, LLC, referred to as New Rise, a former licensee of the Ecko Unlimited trademark, and Sichuan New Rise Import & Export Co. Ltd., referred to as Sichuan (and, together with New Rise, referred to as the Plaintiffs), the guarantor under New Rise’s license agreement, commenced an action captioned New Rise Brands Holdings, LLC and Sichuan New Rise Import & Export Co. Ltd v. IP Holdings, LLC, et al., Index No. 652278/2016 in the New York State Supreme Court, New York County against the Company’s subsidiary, IP Holdings, LLC, referred to as IP Holdings, seeking damages of $15 million, plus punitive damages of $50 million, counsel fees and costs. Among other claims, Plaintiffs allege improper termination of New Rise’s license agreement and fraud and misappropriation. IP Holdings is vigorously defending against the claims and has asserted counterclaims against Plaintiffs. At this time, the Company is unable to estimate the ultimate outcome of this legal matter. Two shareholder derivative complaints captioned James v. Cuneo et al, Docket No. 1:16-cv-02212 and Ruthazer v. Cuneo et al, Docket No. 1:16-cv-04208 have been consolidated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and three shareholder derivative complaints captioned De Filippis v. Cuneo et al. Index No. 650711/2016, Gold v. Cole et al, Index No. 53724/2016 and Rosenfeld v. Cuneo et al., Index No. 510427/2016 have been consolidated in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. The complaints name the Company as a nominal defendant and assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty, insider trading and unjust enrichment against certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers arising out of the Company's restatement of financial reports and certain employee departures. At this time, the Company is unable to estimate the ultimate outcome of these matters. As previously announced, the Company has received a formal order of investigation from the SEC. The Company intends to continue to cooperate fully with the SEC. Three securities class actions have been consolidated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, under the caption In re Iconix Brand Group, Inc., et al., Docket No. 1:15-cv-4860, against the Company and certain former officers and one current officer (the “Class Action”). The plaintiffs in the Class Action purport to represent a class of purchasers of the Company’s securities from February 22, 2012 to November 5, 2015, inclusive, and claim that the Company and individual defendants violated sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, by making allegedly false and misleading statements regarding certain aspects of the Company’s business operations and prospects. On October 25, 2017, the Court granted the motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint filed by the Company and the individual defendants with leave to amend. On November 14, 2017, the plaintiffs filed a second consolidated amended complaint. The Company and the individual defendants intend to vigorously defend against the claims. At this time, the Company is unable to estimate the ultimate outcome of these legal matters. From time to time, the Company is also made a party to litigation incurred in the normal course of business. In addition, in connection with litigation commenced against licensees for non-payment of royalties, certain licensees have asserted unsubstantiated counterclaims against the Company. While any litigation has an element of uncertainty, the Company believes that the final outcome of any of these routine matters will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or future liquidity.

10. Contingencies

In July 2013, Signature Apparel Group LLC, referred to as Signature, filed an amended complaint in an adversary proceeding captioned Signature Apparel Group LLC v. ROC Fashions, LLC, et al., United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Adv. Pro. No. 11-02800 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York that, among others, named Studio IP Holdings LLC (“Studio IP”) and the Company (the Company and Studio IP, collectively referred to as “Iconix”), as defendants. The causes of action in the amended complaint relate to a series of events from September 2009 with respect to which Signature sought at least $8.8 million in damages from Iconix. In August 2017, the Bankruptcy Court rendered a decision in this matter. In that decision, the Court found that one of Signature’s principals must disgorge $2.05 million of the consulting fees that he received in breach of his fiduciary duties to Signature and that Iconix was jointly and severally liable for this amount, plus interest as applicable. The Court also found Iconix liable on the causes of action asserted against it in the amended complaint, including negligent misrepresentation, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract (Studio IP only), fraud, and tortious interference with contract (the Company only). The Court ordered supplemental post-trial briefing related solely to the calculation of additional damages, if any, to be awarded to Signature. Signature, through its brief filed on November 3, 2017, now alleges damages of up to $70 million, plus counsel fees and interest as applicable. Iconix strongly disagrees with the basis for and the amounts of damages claimed by Signature and, in its responsive brief filed on December 8, 2017, argued vigorously that no additional damages are warranted. However, given the uncertainty of how the Bankruptcy Court will rule with respect to damages, Iconix cannot, at this time, estimate the amount of additional damages, if any.

In April 2016, New Rise Brands Holdings, LLC, referred to as New Rise, a former licensee of the Ecko Unlimited trademark, and Sichuan New Rise Import & Export Co. Ltd., referred to as Sichuan (and, together with New Rise, referred to as the Plaintiffs), the guarantor under New Rise’s license agreement, commenced an action captioned New Rise Brands Holdings, LLC and Sichuan New Rise Import & Export Co. Ltd v. IP Holdings, LLC, et al., Index No. 652278/2016 in the New York State Supreme Court, New York County against the Company’s subsidiary, IP Holdings, LLC, referred to as IP Holdings, seeking damages of $15 million, plus punitive damages of $50 million, counsel fees and costs. Among other claims, Plaintiffs allege improper termination of New Rise’s license agreement and fraud and misappropriation. IP Holdings is vigorously defending against the claims and has asserted counterclaims against Plaintiffs. At this time, the Company is unable to estimate the ultimate outcome of this legal matter.

Two shareholder derivative complaints captioned James v. Cuneo et al, Docket No. 1:16-cv-02212 and Ruthazer v. Cuneo et al, Docket No. 1:16-cv-04208 have been consolidated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and three shareholder derivative complaints captioned De Filippis v. Cuneo et al. Index No. 650711/2016, Gold v. Cole et al, Index No. 53724/2016 and Rosenfeld v. Cuneo et al., Index No. 510427/2016 have been consolidated in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. The complaints name the Company as a nominal defendant and assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty, insider trading and unjust enrichment against certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers arising out of the Company's restatement of financial reports and certain employee departures. At this time, the Company is unable to estimate the ultimate outcome of these matters.

As previously announced, the Company has received a formal order of investigation from the SEC. The Company intends to continue to cooperate fully with the SEC.

Three securities class actions have been consolidated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, under the caption In re Iconix Brand Group, Inc., et al., Docket No. 1:15-cv-4860, against the Company and certain former officers and one current officer (the “Class Action”). The plaintiffs in the Class Action purport to represent a class of purchasers of the Company’s securities from February 22, 2012 to November 5, 2015, inclusive, and claim that the Company and individual defendants violated sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, by making allegedly false and misleading statements regarding certain aspects of the Company’s business operations and prospects. On October 25, 2017, the Court granted the motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint filed by the Company and the individual defendants with leave to amend. On November 14, 2017, the plaintiffs filed a second consolidated amended complaint. The Company and the individual defendants intend to vigorously defend against the claims. At this time, the Company is unable to estimate the ultimate outcome of these legal matters.

From time to time, the Company is also made a party to litigation incurred in the normal course of business. In addition, in connection with litigation commenced against licensees for non-payment of royalties, certain licensees have asserted unsubstantiated counterclaims against the Company. While any litigation has an element of uncertainty, the Company believes that the final outcome of any of these routine matters will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or future liquidity.