University Of Kentucky Disputes 40-0 Trademark Owned By Someone Else While 2 Wins Away From Achieving That Record

from the confidence-is-high dept

Thu, Apr 2nd 2015 1:50pm — Timothy Geigner

For those of you that haven't been paying attention to the NCAA Men's College Basketball tournament this year, the University of Kentucky is, like, really good. The team, which entered the tournament without a loss on its record is attempting to become the first undefeated champion in several decades, the last occurring when Bobby Knight took a break from throwing chairs across the court to win it all for Indiana in 1976. They are currently two games away from achieving the first forty-and-zero season in college basketball history.

But they're already fighting trademark battles over a perfect season they have yet to attain. The school recently sent a cease and desist letter to one David Son, who has been using the "40-0" mark since 2013 and filed for a trademark back in October of that year.

That's the same time he filed for his company, 40-0 LLC, to be incorporated in the state of Kentucky before dissolving in August 2014. Records with the state show that on March 9 of this year, Son applied and was approved to have the company be reinstated and activated again.

"My client took all the steps he needed to take to establish ownership of 40-0," Son's lawyer, Brian McGraw, said. "There's no evidence that the University of Kentucky owns any rights to 40-0."

It strains credulity to suggest that the timing for the reinstatement and the potential run by the Kentucky basketball team is coincidental, and I'm unclear as to why the reinstatement of the company should be an argument over the previous abandonment of the mark. That said, two years isn't a particularly long stretch of time and, assuming Son's lawyer has done his homework, Kentucky's lack of claim to any mark makes a cease and desist overreach to say the least. Perhaps more interesting would be how this all works if Kentucky can point to some kind of trademark filing, given that the mark would consist both of an attainment the school can't yet lay claim to and that, should Kentucky indeed go 40-0, the numeric record seems to be factual information, likely undeserving of a mark in any case. As the ESPN article notes, opposition to Son's mark would seem to be the more logical reaction from the school, rather than a C&D letter.

What's strange is the accompanying remarks from Kentucky's legal team.

"We are well aware of third parties attempting to capitalize on the historic season of the University of Kentucky men's basketball team," said Jim Aronowitz, general counsel for Fermata Partners. "As the University's licensing agent, we are working to vigorously protect UK's trademark rights in the marketplace from those that use the institution's indicia without permission."

Except the history hasn't been made yet, counselor. Not that such prospective hubris is without precedent. The New England Patriots wanted to trademark "19-0" even after they failed to run the NFL table several years back. Is this a simple matter of trademark "squatting," with Son, who lives in Kentucky and is a self-admitted Kentucky basketball fan, realizing the likely outcome here? Sure, probably, though that claim is made more problematic given the years-old history of Son's mark. Still, factual information is factual information.

The two easiest ways to resolve this? Well, the school can file an opposition to the mark instead of sending off threat letters, or they could simply lose one of these next two games. Then there would be nothing to fight over.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: 40-0, kentucky, sports, trademark
Companies: university of kentucky

22 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 2 Apr 2015 @ 2:11pm

We're talking about trademarking a ratio correct?

Well then why don't they trademark the version that displays ratios correctly instead of using a dash?

40:0
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- RD, 2 Apr 2015 @ 2:25pm
  
  Re:
  No, the statistic its a win/loss record. The common usage is wins *dash* loses. It's not a ratio. It also should never be granted as a trademark, as any pair of numbers separated by a dash should be considered too common to be granted protection. Now, if they wanted to do something like "Kentucky 40-0!" or something that might pass as a more unique phrase, that might be different.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
RD, 2 Apr 2015 @ 2:22pm

"Legal Grounds"
"Well, you see, our legal grounds are that we are a Big Ten college and that guy is just some average schmo. *Obviously* we should be granted the mark, since the laws are there to protect our interests, and not some little guy's. Why are we even discussing this??"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mowgs (profile), 2 Apr 2015 @ 2:42pm

Isn't this a tennis score?
Surprised all the Grand Slam tennis tournaments aren't contesting this too. Forty-Love (40-0) is called all the time in tennis so how can Kentucky suddenly decide this needs to be trademarked. Oh yes, because they can!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Zonker, 2 Apr 2015 @ 3:15pm
  
  Re: Isn't this a tennis score?
  Forty-Love sounds like a perfect name for a dating website that provides matches to forty year old clients. David Son, if you build it they will come.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Roger Strong (profile), 2 Apr 2015 @ 3:26pm

The Universal Tool
Another alternative: The NCAA arranges a 41st game, so that the school gets a 41-0 record.

40-0 LLC's foreign investors then use investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) rules to sue the federal government for their investment losses caused by this change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
drjimmy (profile), 2 Apr 2015 @ 3:42pm

All one has to do is to look at who Kentucky elects into office and that tells you everything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Apr 2015 @ 3:52am

Hopefully the Badgers will make this little marks issue moot...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeff Green (profile), 3 Apr 2015 @ 4:23am

Speaking of silly trademarks ...
As a British subject I strongly object to the University of Kentucky infringing on our will known and historically important UK mark. We are quite capable of our own stupidity without someone else trying to usurp our interests.
Where do we go to sue ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris ODonnell (profile), 3 Apr 2015 @ 5:22am

As if I needed another reason to root against KY this weekend.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Apr 2015 @ 7:00am

It will be interesting to see what Son does with his company if Kentucky loses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 3 Apr 2015 @ 7:23am

Forty?
I just want to point out that the UConn women's team went 90-0.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oblate (profile), 3 Apr 2015 @ 8:20am

Well if they're going to act like that
I hope that if they do lose* a game, that their opponent has already trademarked the term "39-1".

*not actually rooting for or against
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RedGreenBlue, 3 Apr 2015 @ 10:12am

40 and 0
Here's another problem for Kentucky. If the team goes undefeated, it won't be "the first forty-and-zero season in college basketball history," it will be the third since the Baylor University and University of Connecticut women's teams already accomplished the feat in 2012 and 2014, respectively. And shame on ESPN.com for overlooking this fact.

I think Baylor and UConn should be getting ready to put their own cease-and-desist letters in the mail, addressed to the University of Kentucky.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike C. (profile), 3 Apr 2015 @ 10:57am
  
  Re: 40 and 0
  Actually, it may not even be third...
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basketball_winning_streaks
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - RedGreenBlue, 3 Apr 2015 @ 11:35am
    
    40 and 0
    There certainly have been longer college basketball winning streaks, but in this case 40-0 refers only to a 'perfect' season, ending in a national championship. There also have been other undefeated champions, such as Indiana's men's team, 32-0 in 1976, and the UConn women at 39-0 in each of 2009 and 2010. For all I know, there have been longer undefeated seasons in other levels of basketball, but the assumption in Kentucky's claim is Division 1 college basketball. They should have said Division 1 men's college basketball, but that's too long to be part of a snappy graphic on a best-selling tee shirt, isn't it?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Apr 2015 @ 8:23pm

LOL 39-1 now! So it really doesn't matter! ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steve Landess (profile), 5 Apr 2015 @ 5:31am

40-0
Oops -

Now the U of Ky can file a trademark on 39-0!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Steve Landess (profile), 5 Apr 2015 @ 5:44am
  
  Re: 40-0
  doh - I meant 39-1
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2015 @ 9:17am
    
    Re: Re: 40-0
    Doh again! 38-1... they didn't make it to the 40th game, thanks to my Badgers!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Steve Landess (profile), 5 Apr 2015 @ 12:52pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: 40-0
      Ok. I'm an ID10T.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
afn29129 (profile), 5 Apr 2015 @ 12:07pm

Tucky Lost !!
So much for the arrogant conceitedness of Kuntucky.

Still want the 40-0 trademark Kentucky? LOL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]