Trade marks in US sports: A review of the Vegas Golden Knights & Milwaukee Bucks applicationsRyan Hilbert
Trademark law is notoriously subjective. Courts have long recognized that likelihood of confusion is frequently a disputed issue upon which reasonable minds may differ. Therefore, it is not entirely uncommon for an examiner at the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office to tacitly conclude during the examination process that an applied-for mark is not confusingly similar to another mark, only to have that same applied-for mark eventually be denied registration after it is successfully challenged by a third party who demonstrates the exact opposite. This dichotomy can often make trademark prosecution in the U.S. incredibly complex.
The subjective nature of trademark law and its effects was on full display in early December 2016 in a pair of announcements about the NHL’s newest franchise, the Vegas Golden Knights, and a dispute between the NBA’s Milwaukee Bucks and the popular German liqueur-maker, Mast-Jagermeister. In the first, it was announced on December 8 that the Vegas Golden Knights’ application to register its team name as a trademark had been refused by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office because the mark was deemed confusingly similar to a mark previously registered by the College of Saint Rose in Albany, New York. In the second, it was announced one day later on December 9 that Jagermeister had formally opposed the Milwaukee Bucks’ application to register the team’s re-designed logo on the ground that it was confusingly similar to Jagermeister’s deer logo.
The article examines – and juxtaposes – the facts behind each of these situations in more detail. In doing so, it also demonstrates that even the simplest-seeming trademark matter can actually be incredibly complicated.
...to continue reading register here for free
LawInSport is an independent publisher used by sports lawyers, sports business executives and administrators, athletes and support personnel, academics and students to stay informed of the latest legal issues and developments from the world of sport. It is our mission to improve the accountability, transparency and standard of the administration and governance of sport and the understanding of the law.
Thank you for considering becoming a member of LawInSport, supporting independent media and the promotion well researched, reference and accessible legal information that contributes to greater transparency and accountability in the sport and legal sectors.
This work was written for and first published on LawInSport.com (unless otherwise stated) and the copyright is owned by LawInSport Ltd. Permission to make digital or hard copies of this work (or part, or abstracts, of it) for personal use provided copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage, and provided that all copies bear this notice and full citation on the first page (which should include the URL, company name (LawInSport), article title, author name, date of the publication and date of use) of any copies made. Copyright for components of this work owned by parties other than LawInSport must be honoured.
- Tags: Basketball | Ice Hockey | Intellectual Property | National Basketball Association (NBA) | National Hockey League (NHL) | Trademarks | United States of America (USA)
- Why the latest Jordan Qiaodan case leaves uncertainty about trademark protection in China
- Why football players and managers should own their own trade marks
- Mark my words: protection of athletes’ nicknames & catchphrases in the U.S.
- Michael Jordan in naming rights and trademark disputes in China
About the Author
Ryan Hilbert is an attorney with Holley & Menker, P.A. where he practices in the areas of intellectual property prosecution and counseling, licensing and litigation, particularly in the sports and entertainment industries.