From Campus to Courtroom: How Penn State’s Trademark Victory Highlights the Importance of Universities’ Intellectual Property

Credit: AP News

Introduction

Longhorns, Trojans, Bulldogs, and Buckeyes are just some of the logos and trademarks that are synonymous with the nation’s largest institutions of higher education. Countless clothing, memorabilia, accessories, and merchandise are manufactured every year with universities’ trademarks on them. With lucrative name, image, and likeness (NIL) contracts now permitted for college athletes, along with the expanded number of games in collegiate football playoffs leading to an increase in tv viewership, collegiate sports are more popular than ever. More fans and viewership means an increase in potential purchases of trademarked merchandise for universities and authorized retailers. No longer are player jerseys the only sports clothing that one can buy to demonstrate their allegiance to a team. Universities and professional sports organizations are now being forced to diversify the logo and trademark offerings on their merchandise to appease customers. For lots of colleges and universities, this means offering merchandise with their vintage and heritage trademarks on them. 

Background 

In recent years, there has been a noticeable rise in the popularity of vintage collegiate merchandise. Retro logos, throwback jerseys, and classic designs evoke a sense of nostalgia for alumni and sports fans alike. This trend is part of a broader resurgence in vintage fashion with consumers seeking items that offer a connection to the past. Universities have recognized this cultural shift and are capitalizing on it by reintroducing vintage logos as part of their official branding strategies. For example, Hollister debuted an apparel collection featuring graphics from more than thirty different colleges and universities, aiming to mesh school spirit with a vintage aesthetic. 

However, this resurgence has also attracted unauthorized third-party sellers. As demand for vintage collegiate gear grows, unlicensed merchandise has begun to flood the market. These sellers often make older university logos and designs without permission, banking on the appeal of retro aesthetics while evading licensing agreements. This newfound market poses significant challenges for universities, creating a pressing need to protect their intellectual property, including both their modern branding and their historical emblems. With trademark infringement cases on the rise, universities are increasingly taking legal action to safeguard their legacy, brand, and the financial value tied to their trademarks. 

Pennsylvania State University v. Vintage Brand LLC

In Pennsylvania State University v. Vintage Brand LLC, Penn State alleged that Vintage Brand and Sportswear (Vintage Brand) was producing and selling merchandise featuring its iconic Nittany Lion logo, name, and university seal without authorization. Vintage Brand’s defense centered on the argument that Penn State’s trademarks were being used in an “ornamental” fashion. Essentially, they claimed that the logos served a decorative, rather than trademark, purpose. 

The ornamental use defense hinges on the idea that the logo or marker is perceived by consumers as merely a design element, rather than an indicator of the product’s origin. Vintage brand asserted that its use of Penn State’s logo was an aesthetic and did not imply endorsement by or affiliation with the university. In response, Penn State argued that its trademarks, including vintage designs, were a core part of its identity and that consumers inherently associate those logos with the university itself, regardless of whether they are modern or retro iterations. Ultimately, the jury rejected Vintage Brand’s ornamental use argument and sided with Penn State, finding that the sale of products featuring these marks constitutes trademark infringement. The jury awarded Penn State $28,000 in damages, marking a significant affirmation of university rights over its trademarks. 

This is not the only lawsuit that Vintage Brand has faced regarding trademark infringement of a university’s logo. University of Arizona, Arizona State University, University of Oregon, Oregon State University, Stanford University, University of Southern California, University of California Los Angeles, Purdue University, and Baylor University all have lawsuits against Vintage Brand for trademark infringement. 

Impact

For Penn State, the court’s ruling reaffirms the importance of trademarks and logos not just for brands and corporations but for higher education institutions as well. Logos are not only a way for the public to recognize a university, but in many ways, they are synonymous with the university’s identity, location, and purpose. The University of California, Berkeley’s “Golden Bears” links the university to the emblem on the state flag of California. Oklahoma State University’s “Pistol Pete” cowboy logo speaks to the university’s history on the Oklahoma prairie and its prominence in agricultural fields. The United States Air Force Academy chose a falcon symbol as its mascot since falcons are “known for its speed, power, courage, and agility, all noble characteristics that cadets and future Airmen and Guardians should strive to embody.” A university’s logo and trademark are much more than a simple brand identifier, and Penn State being able to protect its intellectual property from those illegally profiting from it prevents potential brand dilution and consumer confusion. 

The significance of Penn State’s legal victory goes beyond simply benefitting the university. This ruling also protects the multitude of retailers and sellers that Penn State has licensing agreements with. These retailers create lucrative agreements with universities and professional sports teams to ensure that they are able to sell officially licensed materials without threats of lawsuits from universities and organizations. Licensed merchandisers are able to exclusively sell the latest authentic gear from sports organizations. In turn, sports organizations offer access to their fan bases to these brands, thus encouraging sales for these merchandisers. Unlicensed sellers being able to sell trademarked merchandise interferes with the profitability of that logo not only for the universities and professional organizations but also for the licensed merchandisers who rely on the exclusivity of selling authentic, trademarked merchandise to drive sales.

For unauthorized third-party sellers, there is now more of an incentive to become officially licensed retailers of professional and collegiate sports teams. The increase in the popularity of sports, and the ease of setting up an online website to sell one’s goods, makes it all too easy for sellers to begin selling unlicensed products, exposing themselves to potential litigation. Universities are notorious for protecting their trademarks and this ruling indicates that this is not going to change anytime soon. 

Conclusion 

Penn State’s victory delivers a powerful message: universities will fiercely protect their trademarks, whether it is tied to modern or vintage branding. As collegiate sports reach new heights, Name, Image, and Likeness deals continue to elevate the commercial value of university brands, and schools have never been more motivated to defend their intellectual property.

This case makes it clear that trademarks are far more than logos on merchandise. They are symbols of reputation, tradition, and the deep connection between universities and their communities. The court’s ruling not only safeguards Penn State from brand dilution but also strengthens the trust behind its licensing agreements. Licensed merchandise ensures authenticity and quality, benefiting universities, their retail partners, and fans who expect genuine products.  For third-party sellers, this decision sends an unmistakable warning. Unauthorized use of university trademarks, whether labeled as vintage nostalgia or ornamental design, carries serious consequences. This rule reinforces the importance of playing by the rules and encourages sellers to pursue legitimate licensing partnerships, helping preserve a fair and competitive market for collegiate merchandise. 

Penn State’s courtroom win is a statement of principle: a university’s identity and legacy are worth protecting, and institutions are ready to fight for them.

*The views expressed in this article do not represent the views of Santa Clara University.