College Sports Trademark Battles: From Rivalries to Courtrooms & Brand Control

The role of trademarks becomes particularly visible when it intersects with one of the most well-known rivalries in college sports: The Ohio State University v. The Brown Jug, Inc.

a. Case Background

In 2025, Ohio State filed a notice of opposition with the USPTO against a Michigan-based restaurant, The Brown Jug, which sought to trademark the phrase “Buckeye Tears” for beer and liquor products.

The phrase draws directly from rivalry culture, referencing Ohio State’s “Buckeyes” in a humorous and provocative way. The application was filed on an “intent to use” basis, meaning the product had not yet been widely commercialized and had only appeared in limited contexts without official university logos or branding.

This context is important. The Ohio State–Michigan rivalry, one of the most storied in U.S. sports, creates a cultural environment where such expressions are common. However, once these expressions move into the marketplace, they may also fall within the scope of trademark law. This shift—from cultural expression to commercial use—sets the stage for the legal dispute.

b. Ohio State’s Legal Arguments

From a legal perspective, the dispute centers on two main concerns.

1. Ohio State argues that the phrase could create consumer confusion, meaning that buyers might mistakenly believe the product is affiliated with or endorsed by the university. This concept—known as the “likelihood of confusion”—is a cornerstone of trademark law and often determines whether a mark can be registered or used.
2. The university raises concerns about brand dilution and reputational harm, particularly due to the association with alcohol. Given the scale of its licensing program—reportedly generating over $145 million in royalties and approximately $2.2 billion in retail sales over the past decade—Ohio State has a strong incentive to control how its brand is used and perceived in the marketplace (CBS Sports).

c. Trademark Law vs. Cultural Expression

At the same time, one might question whether “Buckeye Tears” would actually confuse consumers. In context, it seems more like a tongue-in-cheek reference to a historic rivalry than an official product.

This raises a broader issue: how far should trademark protection go when it intersects with fan culture? Rivalries, humor, and parody are central to the college sports experience, yet they often rely on the same identities that trademarks aim to control.

Ultimately, the challenge lies in deciding where expression ends and infringement begins.

d. Current Status

As of early 2026, the dispute remains unresolved, with proceedings potentially extending over several years. Regardless of its outcome, the case provides a clear illustration of how trademark law operates in practice.

More importantly, it demonstrates how far trademark enforcement can extend—reaching beyond logos and names into the broader cultural use of a university’s identity. Universities are no longer focused solely on preventing direct copying; they are increasingly attentive to how their brands are referenced, interpreted, and even challenged in commercial contexts (Ohio State Buckeyes).

6. More Than a Game

What begins as school spirit—team names, colors, mascots, and rivalries—quickly evolves into something far more valuable. These elements drive merchandise sales, media deals, sponsorships, and fan engagement at a national scale. As their economic importance grows, so does the need to control how they are used.

Trademark law has become the mechanism that makes this control possible. It allows universities and organizations like the NCAA to define who can use their identity, in what context, and for what purpose. Whether through licensing agreements, enforcement actions, or high-profile disputes like “Buckeye Tears,” institutions are continuously shaping the boundaries of their brand.

This dynamic is not unique to universities. As explored in “AI & Celebrity NIL: An Intellectual Fight to Protect Real Identities”, similar challenges are emerging in the context of individual identity, where public figures increasingly rely on intellectual property tools to control how their name, image, and likeness are used in digital and commercial environments.

In this sense, college sports operate at the intersection of competition and commerce. Games may determine winners on the scoreboard, but trademarks determine who controls the meaning—and ultimately the value—behind those wins.

7. FAQ

1. Why is “March Madness” trademarked?

The NCAA owns the trademark to control how the term is used commercially. This ensures that the tournament’s massive economic value—driven by media rights, sponsorships, and advertising—remains tied to official partners.

2. What was the “Buckeye Tears” case about?

Ohio State opposed a Michigan-based business’s attempt to trademark “Buckeye Tears,” arguing it could create confusion and harm its brand. The case highlights how even rivalry-based or humorous expressions can raise legal questions when used in a commercial context.

3. How do trademarks turn college sports into real business assets?

Trademarks give universities legal control over the names, logos, colors, and phrases that fans associate with their programs. That control allows schools to license apparel, authorize branded products, structure sponsorship deals, and protect the exclusivity that gives those relationships value. Without trademark protection, it would be much harder for universities to maintain a consistent brand or capture the commercial value tied to fan loyalty.

4. What happens if someone uses a college brand without permission?

They may face legal action, including cease-and-desist letters, licensing disputes, or formal proceedings before the USPTO. The outcome often depends on whether the use creates consumer confusion or improperly exploits the brand.

5. Where is the line between fan expression and trademark infringement?

This is one of the most debated questions in trademark law. While fan culture often includes parody, humor, and rivalry-based expressions, problems arise when those uses enter the marketplace and begin to look like official or endorsed products.