Penn State wins trademark lawsuit against online retailer that used retro logos on merchandise
Penn State emerged victorious Tuesday after a jury found an online retailer infringed on several of the university’s vintage trademarks.
An eight-person jury awarded $28,000 to the university at the end of a six-day trial. Jurors found Vintage Brand and Sportswear Inc. infringed on six of the university’s trademarks.
”Our trademarks are a direct and critical representation of the Penn State brand, and we are gratified by the jury’s decision in our favor,” Penn State said in a statement Wednesday. “The University appreciates this result as it relates to the many hundreds of licensees with whom the University works and who go through the appropriate processes to use Penn State’s trademarks.”
Penn State alleged the companies — both co-founded by former minor league baseball player Chad Hartvigson — violated trademark and unfair competition laws by using its trademarks without permission.
Without a deal in place and because the items are similar to officially licensed merchandise, Penn State said in court filings that the companies “free rides off of Penn State’s reputation.”
Vintage Brand has been sued for trademark infringement by more than a handful of other universities, including fellow Big Ten schools Illinois, Oregon, Purdue, UCLA, USC and Washington.
Vintage Brand acknowledged it did not have a license to use any of Penn State’s trademarks, but instead unsuccessfully argued its merchandise used logos and images that are in the public domain and not protected by trademark law.
The company’s website included disclaimers its designs were not “affiliated with, licensed, or sponsored by any college, team or league,” but that was not enough to shield them from liability.
The company sold nearly 1,300 products through its Penn State page, pulling in more than $23,000.
It was not immediately known if Hartvigson’s companies plan to appeal. A message left with the companies’ attorneys was not immediately returned Wednesday afternoon.
The lawsuit was closely watched by some academics and trademark rights advocates, especially after U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann questioned the long-standing foundation on which sports merchandising is built.
The case touched on “broad and substantial” questions about collegiate merchandising rights in trademark law, he wrote in a pre-trial ruling.
“The modern collegiate trademark- and licensing-regime has grown into a multibillion-dollar industry,” Brann wrote.
“But that a house is large is of little matter if it’s been built on sand.”
This story was originally published November 20, 2024 at 4:00 PM.