Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: November 4, 2019
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comCollege football fans may have likely noticed that players from Ohio State University (“OSU”) take great pride in referring to their alma mater as “The Ohio State University.” To capitalize on that notoriety, Ohio State is seeking to register a trademark for its use of the word “THE.”
It is not completely surprising that OSU is pursuing this trademark application given that it has taken a proactive approach to protecting its intellectual property. At last count, the university has 150 trademarks in 17 different countries, including the names of football coaches Woody Hayes and Urban Meyer.
Ohio State also aggressively polices the use of its trademarks. In 2013, Ohio State sent a cease-and-desist letter to Brittney’s Cakes, alleging that the bakery infringed its marks in selling Ohio State-themed cakes. In 2014, OSU sent a cease-and-desist letter to Columbia Gas of Ohio, which used a photo of Ohio State’s student section as part of a promotion to give away OSU football tickets.
While some characterize OSU as a “bully,” the university maintains that it is simply protecting its brands. “Like other institutions, Ohio State works to vigorously protect the university’s brand and trademarks,” Chris Davey, a spokesman for the university, said in a recent statement to the Columbus Dispatch. “These assets hold significant value, which benefits our students and faculty and the broader community by supporting our core academic mission of teaching and research.”
According to Ohio State’s trademark registration application (Application No. 88571984), the university seeks to use the word “THE” primarily on t-shirts, baseball caps and hats. While OSU’s efforts to trademark such a common word has caused a lot of buzz in the media, it will be up to a USPTO trademark examination attorney to make the final call.
Under U.S. trademark law, “A trademark or service mark includes any word, name, symbol, device, or any combination, used or intended to be used to identify and distinguish the goods/services of one seller or provider from those of others, and to indicate the source of the goods/services.” The primary requirement is that the mark indicates the source of the goods in the mind of the consumer.
Common words and phrases that simply name a product are not eligible for trademark protection. However, common words that are arbitrary and not related to the product may be eligible. The classic example is that Apple Inc. can trademark the word “Apple” in reference to its products. However, a fruit business that sells apples can’t register a trademark for the name Apple because consumers would view it as merely conveying general information about the goods or services rather than as a means to identify and distinguish the applicant’s goods/services from those of others.
Because the function of a trademark is to identify a single commercial source for particular goods or services, if consumers are accustomed to seeing a term or phrase used in connection with goods or services from many different sources, it is likely that consumers would not view the matter as a source indicator for the goods or services. As described by the USPTO in its Trademark Manual of Examining Procedures, “The critical inquiry in determining whether matter functions as a trademark or service mark is how the proposed mark would be perceived by the relevant public.”
Not surprisingly, on September 11, the Trademark Office issued an office action preliminary rejecting this application on the ground that OSU’s use of the word “THE” is merely ornamental, and not an indication of source. The examiner notes that the word “THE” appears in the upper-center area in front of the shirt, and the front portion of the hat, where ornamental features typically appear. Further, the examiner opines that the large size of the word “THE” on the clothing further indicates that the word is decorative, and not a source indicator. OSU now has six months from the date of the office action to respond to and attempt to overcome this refusal.
Determining trademark eligibility can involve complex legal analysis and there are certainly a lot of grey areas. In this case, Ohio State may have the resources to take its chances with the USPTO. It is always advisable to consult with an experienced intellectual property attorney before investing significant time and resources developing a brand or logo.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-806-3364.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
The Trump Administration’s new tariffs are having an oversized impact on small businesses, which already tend to operate on razor thin margins. Many businesses have been forced to raise prices, find new suppliers, lay off staff, and delay growth plans. For businesses facing even more dire financial circumstances, there are additional tariff response options, including […]
Author: Brian D. Spector
Business partnerships, much like marriages, function exceptionally well when partners are aligned but can become challenging when disagreements arise. Partnership disputes often stem from conflicts over business strategy, financial management, and unclear role definitions among partners. Understanding Business Partnership Conflicts Partnership conflicts place significant stress on businesses, making proactive measures essential. Partnerships should establish detailed […]
Author: Christopher D. Warren
*** The original article was featured on Bloomberg Tax, April 28, 2025 — As a tax attorney who spends much of my time helping people and companies who have large, unresolved issues with the IRS or one or more state tax departments, it often occurs to me that the best service that I can provide […]
Author: Scott H. Novak
On January 28, 2025, the Trump Administration terminated Gwynne Wilcox from her position as a Member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board). Gwynne Wilcox, a union side lawyer for Levy Ratner, was confirmed to the Board for an original term in 2021 and confirmed again for a successive five-year term expiring […]
Author: Matthew F. Mimnaugh
Breach of contract disputes are the most common type of business litigation. Therefore, nearly all New York and New Jersey businesses will likely have to deal with a contract dispute at least once. Understanding when to file a breach of contract lawsuit and how long you have to sue for breach of contract is essential […]
Author: Brittany P. Tarabour
Closing your business can be a difficult and challenging task. For corporations, the process includes formal approval of the dissolution, winding up operations, resolving tax liabilities, and filing all required paperwork. Whether you need to understand how to dissolve a corporation in New York or New Jersey, it’s imperative to take all of the proper […]
Author: Christopher D. Warren
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!