Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

IP News

By Howard Shire and Christine Weller
October 01, 2019

School is Back in Session – Trademark Roundup

|

Penn State Files Trademark Lawsuit against Sports Beer Brewing Company

On July 26, 2019 the Pennsylvania State University (Penn State), filed a multi-count complaint for federal and state claims for trademark infringement, unfair competition and false designation of origin, dilution, counterfeiting, common law trademark infringement and unfair competition under Pennsylvania law, and is attempting to cancel defendant's conflicting marks. Comparing the Defendant, Paul L. Parshall d/b/a Sports Beer Brewing Company (Parshall), to a cybersquatter, Penn State's complaint alleges that Parshall "secretly" registers famous marks with state trademark offices that do not do substantively check other federal or state trademark records for conflicts before issuing registrations. See, The Pennsylvania State University v. Parshall, Complaint, Dkt No.1, 4:19-cv-01299 (M.D. Pa. Jul 26, 2019). In turn, Penn State alleges, Parshall attempts to license those trademarks to third parties. When Penn State confronted Parshall regarding its putatively infringing conduct, Penn State alleges that Parshall offered to sell Penn State's marks back to it. Id. at 2.

The Complaint identifies numerous registrations that Penn State has obtained in "PENN STATE" formative marks as well as the related "NITTANY LIONS" formative marks for a variety of goods and services for everything from "mustard" to "entertainment services" and "sweatshirts". It claims that since its founding in 1855, and its subsequent operation under the name "The Pennsylvania State University" in 1953, it has become incredibly famous throughout the United States and the world. Indeed, Penn State has 24 campuses, 17,000 faculty members, and over 100,000 students. Id. at 4.

In turn, Parshall, the Complaint alleges, runs a business known as Sports Beer Brewing Company. Id. at 13. On the domain <sportsbeerbrewing.com>, Parshall sells a variety of goods, including beer, cigars and tee shirts. Id. The domain identifies a number of marks that it claims that it has lawfully secured. It offers to sell visitors a variety of goods displaying those marks. Id at 14. The Complaint goes on to describe a common criticism of state trademark registries, in that they often (with a few exceptions) do not do a comprehensive search of other, existing records, before issuing registrations. The end result is that conflicting marks may register, and individuals and entities with no legitimate rights over marks may obtain a state registration. Id. at 18. Penn State claims that Parshall's infringing conduct in attempting to secure a Pennsylvania state trademark registration for PENN STATE formative marks was so blatant that it was contacted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's Governor's Office of General Counsel regarding Parshall's actions. Id. at 19. Penn State claims that it is not alone, and that other trademark holders have sued Parshall for this conduct. Id. Penn State sent a cease and desist letter to Parshall. In response, Parshall suggested that no infringing conduct had occurred on his part, and indicated a willingness to partner with Penn State. Id. at 21. After exchanging correspondence without resolution, Penn State sued in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Defendant sought, and was granted an extension to answer, move, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint until Sept. 23, 2019.

This case draws attention to one common drawback of state trademark registries, and the process of securing state trademark registrations: there is often no comprehensive search available (or completed) before a state trademark registration is filed and granted. This fact causes both defensive and offensive problems for established trademark holders. Penn State certainly was not amused by Parshall's tactics, and characterized Parshall's behavior as "willful", the case as "exceptional", and is seeking his profits, treble damages, and attorneys' fees under 15 U.S.C. §1117(a). Id. at 23.

*****

|

Can OSU Trademark the Word "The"?

On Aug. 8, 2019 in a move that surprised many people (within and without the state of Ohio) The Ohio State University (OSU) filed a trademark application for the word "THE" in connection with "Clothing, namely, t-shirts, baseball caps and hats" in International Class 025. Ser. No. 88/571984. "The" story goes that The Ohio State University wishes to be formally known as THE Ohio State University (emphasis added), as opposed to the more humble OSU or Ohio State University. In an effort to rebrand, and emphasize the desired moniker, the school has created t-shirts, hats, and other merchandise proudly displaying the word "THE" in all capital letters. As part of the campaign and corresponding attempts to confirm the brand, it filed a federal trademark application. See, TSDR Report for "THE", Ser. No. 88/571984 (the OSU Application). Claiming first use in August 2005, the specimen of use was comprised of a screenshot from OSU's official team store. The specimen showed a tee shirt for sale with the word "THE" emblazoned across the front of the shirt, with the OSU logo immediately below it.

On Sept. 11, 2019 the Examiner for the OSU Application issued a non-final office action, citing two main barriers to registration. The first was an application filed by Marc Jacobs Trademarks, L.L.C. on May 6, 2019 in International Classes 18 and 25 for the trademark THE, which the Examiner indicated had priority over the OSU Application. See, TSDR Report for "THE", Ser. No. 88/416806 (the Marc Jacobs Application). The Marc Jacobs Application also has a pending office action issued against it, because the Examiner for that application believes that the specimens of record do not match the drawing. In the view of the Examiner, the two specimens of record, one for a jacket with the label, THE VELVETEEN JEAN JACKET MARC JACOBS, and the second, a bookbag with the label THE BACKPACK MARC JACOBS, differ from the drawing for the mark, which is for the word "THE" alone. Should the applicant in this instance overcome the denial and its application mature into a registration, it may serve as a barrier to the OSU Application. Marc Jacobs has until Feb. 28, 2019 to respond to the office action.

The second issue that the Examiner identified in the OSU Application was that the specimen of record was merely a decorative or ornamental feature of the clothing, and did not function as a trademark. In these cases, the size and location of the alleged mark are significant, and here it was not clear to the Examiner that the mark was being used in a trademark fashion because of its prominent placement and size in relation to the overall design of the shirt. OSU has until March 11, 2019 to respond.

Fans of the free and unrestricted use of grammatical articles, and the public at large, were largely puzzled that not just one, but two entities would seek to obtain a trademark registration for the word "THE". However, neither office's action is final, and it will be interesting to see if either applicant, or perhaps both, can overcome their respective denials. OSU is no stranger to branding battles, having previously entered into a consent and co-existence agreement with Oklahoma State University for use of the acronym OSU in connection with Class 25 goods, after The Board of Regents for Oklahoma State University filed an extension of time to oppose OSU's trademark application, now registration, for the acronym in 2017. See, TSDR Report for Reg. No. 5,358,397. It could be that the Office Action against OSU's THE application is the first step in a larger discussion with Marc Jacobs.

From the wide swath of licensed merchandise available at any university bookstore, it is clear that trademark rights are exceptionally valuable assets for institutions of higher education, and many take extensive steps to enforce their rights, including the filing and maintenance of a robust portfolio of trademarks. They do so for offensive reasons (to prevent others from capitalizing on their goodwill), and also defensive reasons (to have an objective statement and recognition of their rights or conversely lack thereof from the USPTO). From oppositions to federal lawsuits and forceful trademark use guidelines, schools take great care to obtain, protect, and enforce their rights. As these two matters move forward, it will be interesting to see if OSU is able to overcome the denial of its application, and if the Middle District will recognize Parshall's behavior as "exceptional" or "willful." While "exceptional" cases are rare, Penn State characterizes Parshall as a serial infringer, so more schools may come forward with their own suits or other legal action now that Penn State has attempted to teach him a legal lesson.

*****

Howard J. Shire is Editor-in-Chief of this newsletter and a Partner in the New York office of Pepper Hamilton LLP. He can be reached at [email protected]Christine E. Weller is a staff attorney in the Intellectual Property Department of Pepper Hamilton LLP, resident in the Philadelphia office.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using? Image

In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.

Fifth Circuit Rejects Majority 'Independent Economic Value' Test for Infringement Damages Image

Most of the federal circuit courts that have addressed what qualifies either as a "compilation" or as a single creative work apply an "independent economic value" analysis that looks at the market worth of the single creation as of the time when an infringement occurs. But in a recent ruling of first impression, the Fifth Circuit rejected the "independent economic value" test in determining which individual sound recordings are eligible for their own statutory awards and which are part of compilation.

The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies Image

Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.

AI Governance In Practice Image

Regardless of how a company proceeds with identifying AI governance challenges, and folds appropriate mitigation solution into a risk management framework, it is critical to begin with an AI governance program.