Hi, and welcome back to Legal Geek. This week, to celebrate the end of the college football regular season and the national championship chase, we review an ongoing trademark opposition battle between two universities who have been and continue to be rivals on the football field when jockeying for playoff berths. The question at hand: who is entitled to own a Block O in trademark or branding?
My alma mater the Ohio State University is one of the most active trademark registrants and brand protectors in the field, as millions of dollars of revenue are enhanced or protected by the brands of the university. You won't be surprised to learn this is one of the parties in the dispute we cover today, and this is not the first trademark battle in recent times for this OSU.
For example, last year Ohio State tussled with Oklahoma State University over the rights to "OSU" related marks on apparel and other goods. However, that 2017 battle ended quickly as the universities replaced a prior deal over geographic area exclusivity with one based on color schemes, which are different for the two universities. With universities becoming more national and international brands, this type of change in peaceful co-existence agreements is becoming pretty typical. So don't expect to buy any Cowboys gear for Oklahoma State in scarlet and gray, or any Buckeyes gear for Ohio State in orange and black.
Now turning back to this year, the University of Oklahoma filed a federal trademark application on a logo of a band drum major with a block O on the chest of the uniform. Ohio State has opposed this trademark after allowance in an attempt to stop formal registration of the logo by Oklahoma. As we've covered on previous segments, trademark opposition processes allow for third parties who believe they have superior or older rights in a mark to argue for an allowed trademark application to be withdrawn before it registers as a finalized trademark, and this is the final step in the trademark registration process in the U.S..
Many college sports programs use block-style fonts, but Ohio State argues that Oklahoma more typically identifies with "OU" block letters and marks than just a block O. Furthermore, Ohio State argues that Oklahoma band drum majors rarely wear a block O on their chest, and the block O brands have been developed and used since 1898 by Ohio State to identify that university. In other words, a case for consumer confusion is being made over the logo being registered, but this is also Ohio State trying to stop any potential competition in the Block O brand space.
Oklahoma has had drum majors wear such a uniform on at least one occasion, so that assertion by Ohio State may not be deemed persuasive by the Trademark Appeal Board. While the OSU marching band may be a famous part of their university, they have long worn military style uniforms that do not include a big Block O, so the claims about owning Block O in this specific logo's context may also fall flat with the Appeal Board. The key in trademarks is consumer confusion, and it feels like it will be an uphill battle for Ohio State to prove confusion with this Oklahoma registration.
The Bottom Line is, universities are branding experts as this is one of the primary ongoing revenue streams for them. While most may pay more attention to the potential cash being made for college football playoff appearances Oklahoma and Ohio State compete for, these battles in branding may actually have more long term economic effect. In this case, expect Boomer Sooner to roll on to the next round.
Now turning back to this year, the University of Oklahoma filed a federal trademark application on a logo of a band drum major with a block O on the chest of the uniform. Ohio State has opposed this trademark after allowance in an attempt to stop formal registration of the logo by Oklahoma. As we've covered on previous segments, trademark opposition processes allow for third parties who believe they have superior or older rights in a mark to argue for an allowed trademark application to be withdrawn before it registers as a finalized trademark, and this is the final step in the trademark registration process in the U.S..
Many college sports programs use block-style fonts, but Ohio State argues that Oklahoma more typically identifies with "OU" block letters and marks than just a block O. Furthermore, Ohio State argues that Oklahoma band drum majors rarely wear a block O on their chest, and the block O brands have been developed and used since 1898 by Ohio State to identify that university. In other words, a case for consumer confusion is being made over the logo being registered, but this is also Ohio State trying to stop any potential competition in the Block O brand space.
Oklahoma has had drum majors wear such a uniform on at least one occasion, so that assertion by Ohio State may not be deemed persuasive by the Trademark Appeal Board. While the OSU marching band may be a famous part of their university, they have long worn military style uniforms that do not include a big Block O, so the claims about owning Block O in this specific logo's context may also fall flat with the Appeal Board. The key in trademarks is consumer confusion, and it feels like it will be an uphill battle for Ohio State to prove confusion with this Oklahoma registration.
The Bottom Line is, universities are branding experts as this is one of the primary ongoing revenue streams for them. While most may pay more attention to the potential cash being made for college football playoff appearances Oklahoma and Ohio State compete for, these battles in branding may actually have more long term economic effect. In this case, expect Boomer Sooner to roll on to the next round.
----------------------------------
Do you have a question? Send it in!
Thanks for reading. Please provide feedback and legal-themed questions as segment suggestions to me on Twitter @BuckeyeFitzy
