We have covered many trademark opposition cases on this blog. A trademark opposition arises when a trademark application for a logo or brand name that looks and/or sounds too similar to a registered trademark is opposed by the owner of the trademark registration. The owner of the registration will file a Notice of Opposition with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board against the pending application.
One basis for a Notice of Opposition is the likelihood of consumer confusion. However, what happens in a case when consumers speak out and directly deny that?
This is occurring in a recent trademark opposition filed by the University of Alabama against the LIV Golf team 4Aces. The mark in question: the letter “A.”
A vs. A
LIV Golf established itself as a rival golf league to the PGA with its founding in 2021 and first invitational series in 2022. Since nascent teams compose the newer league, they are naturally in the process of registering trademarks for relevant names and logos as they establish themselves.
The LIV Golf team 4Aces filed an intent to use trademark application for the logo of their full name June 16, 2023. At that point, the team had been playing for about a year.
They filed to register the mark in International Class 41 for entertainment services in the nature of arranging, planning, organizing, conducting and athletes participating in professional golf tournaments, matches, competitions and exhibitions; providing sports news and information in the field of golf.
In June 2024, the Board of Trustees for the University of Alabama filed a Notice of Opposition against the LIV Golf trademark application for the stylized mark “A”:
Why? The university claimed that 4Ace’s mark was too “visually similar” to their own logo, which is a singular, stylized capital letter “A”:
They have owned the trademark registration since 2004. The university often employs the stylized “A” in a deep red color on merchandise for the college’s athletic teams, including their golf team.
One can see the overlap between the marks and their usage, which fulfills two factors for identifying the likelihood of trademark confusion – the fanciful curls on the A represent visual similarity, and the logo’s presence on sports uniforms puts them in the same channel of trade for sporting goods.
The university argues that they have invested considerable resources in building a strong brand of athletic success, which would be watered down if sports fans believe 4Aces constitutes a UA team.
But would consumers mistake the LIV Golf team for a University of Alabama team? Would they purchase LIV Golf shirts or hats believing they are Crimson Tide merch?
A “Waste of Resources”
This is where Crimson Tide fans come into play. They have voiced backlash to the university’s opposition on X (formerly Twitter). When a sports law attorney posted about the trademark opposition, with a side-by-side image of the logos, UA fans commented with doubts that they would ever confuse the logos – going so far as to ask if it was a joke. Another fan called the move on UA’s part a “stupid waste of resources.” Will the TTAB take these anecdotes as evidence that consumer confusion is not likely?
Interestingly, multiple brands have struck LIV Golf with IP challenges, including a separate trademark dispute from Adidas over LIV Golf’s striped logo, and another from Cool Brands Supply that attacks that fact that the organization’s financial backing comes from the Saudi Arabian monarchy.
Motivations and Courses of Actions
LIV Golf has requested an extension of 30 days to serve a response to UA’s opposition. So their response is due September 8, 2024. They have not yet hinted as to what they will do. We shall see.
As for the university’s stance, this opposition seems to comprise a pattern of aggressive trademark defense since its 2004 registration, including a case against a baker selling cookies with the script letter “A” on them. The reality may be that the university does not expect or wish to win this opposition – rather, they want to alert brands nationwide that they are on the lookout and will not sit idly by while infringement happens.
Whatever your business, use this story as a reminder: businesses with active trademarks will guard them. Do your due diligence, and engage an IP professional to conduct a thorough trademark clearance search before filing a trademark application. It will help you avoid headaches in the long run – or even at the outset.