It is a ruling that initially sounds like a joke: a New York Civil Division Supreme Court Justice has ruled that golfing legend Jack Nicklaus is now free to use his name and likeness in business once again.

Why was his ability to use them ever in question? And how did this case reach this point?

The Story of Nicklaus Companies, LLC

To understand the background on how Mr. Nicklaus using his own name and likeness could ever become a legal issue, you first need to learn about Nicklaus Companies, LLC. After several tumultuous decades running businesses under different names, Mr. Nicklaus created the Nicklaus Companies, LLC in 2000, and in the early 2000s, it was thriving.

After being valued at almost $300 million, the business began looking for investors. The one Mr. Nicklaus ultimately accepted was from Howard Milstein, who agreed to invest $145 million in exchange for repayment and splitting the business’s profits. Unfortunately, Nicklaus Companies, LLC was hit particularly hard by the Great Recession in 2008, and those profits never really materialized. Despite this, Milstein convinced Mr. Nicklaus to renew the deal in 2012, giving Nicklaus (the man) more income in exchange for handing control of the company over to Milstein. 

This new dynamic frustrated Mr. Nicklaus, and he has at various points complained of being micromanaged by Milstein and ignored by him. Additionally, Milstein was apparently quite protective of Mr. Nicklaus’ name and likeness, even arguing against one of Mr. Nicklaus’ sons using “Nicklaus” as part of the name of his investment firm or posting a picture with Mr. Nicklaus in it.

Everything came to a head in 2017, when Mr. Nicklaus cleared out his company office and “retired” from Nicklaus Companies, LLC. However, a clause in his contract included a five-year non-compete that prevented him from designing golf courses for anyone besides Nicklaus Companies, so he continued to do that – and only that – until 2022. In May of 2022, Mr. Nicklaus completely cut off his ties to the company, and by the end of that year he was providing course-design services through his new business, 1-JN. It was not long before Milstein filed a lawsuit against Mr. Nicklaus in New York state court, and that contentious case has been playing out for the past several years.

Milstein Loses on Every Single Claim

This most recent decision – which a spokesperson for Milstein says he intends to appeal – clarifies that Mr. Nicklaus is no longer restricted by his contract. That means he is legally allowed to use his name and likeness and compete against Nicklaus Companies, including designing golf courses and soliciting the company’s customers and employees. 

In other words, Milstein and Nicklaus Companies lost every single claim against Mr. Nicklaus. However, it is important to note that Nicklaus Companies does still own numerous trademarks related to Mr. Nicklaus, including “Golden Bear” (Nicklaus’ nickname as a golfer), and can continue to engage in business activities that use the Nicklaus name and logos, like selling equipment and clothing and designing golf courses.

If that sounds complicated and confusing, it is. Basically, two competing golf businesses are now allowed to use the Nicklaus name – but one no longer has any involvement from Mr. Nicklaus.

The lesson here? As Mr. Nicklaus was once quoted saying: “I’m not a lawyer. I don’t know what all that stuff is. I wish I did because I probably wouldn’t have gotten into what I got into.” Translation: before you sign away your rights to intellectual property related to yourself and your brand, find an attorney you trust and make sure you understand what you are getting into.