Source: JD Supra
A Pennsylvania federal jury ruled in favor of Pennsylvania State University, finding that Vintage Brand, an online retailer, willfully infringed on the university’s trademarks. The decision marks a significant win for universities and sports teams in their fight to protect against the sale of unlicensed merchandise.
Penn State filed a lawsuit against Vintage Brand, its founder Chad Hartvigson, and the print-on-demand company Prep Sportswear. The university accused the defendants of using its trademarks, including its name, iconic “Nittany Lion” shrine imagery, and an old university seal on unlicensed products such as shirts, hats, and coasters.
Vintage Brand marketed merchandise using “historical” images related to Penn State, often taken from old sports memorabilia. However, the university argued that this use violated its trademarks and could confuse consumers into believing the merchandise was officially licensed.
Vintage Brand argued that its website clearly stated that it was not affiliated with or endorsed by Penn State, making it unlikely for consumers to be confused. They also claimed that Penn State was overreaching by asserting control over historical images and symbols that merely evoked an association with the school, and were not current logos or trademarks used by the university.
Penn State’s legal team argued that unlicensed sellers undermine the integrity of the brand and bypass the quality controls and licensing fees associated with official merchandise.
After a trial began on November 12, the jury deliberated for a day before delivering its verdict. The jury found that Vintage Brand had willfully infringed on Penn State’s trademarks, and defenses such as nominative fair use and aesthetic functionality did not apply.
This case has broader implications for trademark law, reinforcing the protection of iconic university and sports team trademarks, and should serve as a stark warning to retailers against selling unlicensed merchandise. By ruling that the use of these “throwback” trademarks on memorabilia and apparel constitutes infringement, this decision reinforces the principle that brands, regardless of their age, hold legal rights that protect against unauthorized commercial use.
Any retailers that are currently selling products with old, throwback trademarks or the historical imagery of another party should take note of this decision and seek a license to use these marks, or risk being sued for trademark infringement.
