In a clash that extends far beyond the gridiron, the Ohio State University and a Michigan establishment are locked in a legal battle over intellectual property, specifically the phrase “Buckeye Tears.” This trademark dispute highlights the intensity of the rivalry and the importance of brand protection in collegiate athletics. The university’s opposition to the trademark application underscores the high stakes involved when tradition and commerce collide, potentially impacting millions in revenue and brand perception.
Trademark Tussle Brews
The Ohio State University (OSU) has initiated legal action against The Brown Jug, Inc., a restaurant based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, to block the trademarking of “Buckeye Tears” for beer and liquor products. According to a notice of opposition filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, OSU contends that allowing the trademark would create consumer confusion and potentially damage the university’s brand by associating its athletic programs with alcoholic beverages.
The Players Involved
The key players in this dispute are The Ohio State University, fiercely protective of its brand and athletic legacy, and The Brown Jug, Inc., seeking to capitalize on the rivalry with a potentially popular product name. Independent trademark attorney Josh Gerben provides an expert perspective on the complexities of the case, suggesting that proving consumer confusion may be a challenge for OSU.
Timeline of the Trademark Opposition
The Brown Jug submitted its trademark application last year, setting the stage for the current legal showdown. Ohio State University officially filed its notice of opposition on August 27, 2025, initiating the formal challenge. The Brown Jug has until October 6, 2025, to respond to Ohio State’s opposition. The resolution of this dispute could extend into 2027, as the legal process unfolds within the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Brand Protection at Stake
Ohio State University’s primary motivation for contesting the trademark is the protection of its valuable brand and reputation. The university’s licensing program is a significant revenue generator, bringing in over $145 million in royalties and approximately $2.2 billion in retail sales over the past decade, according to university data. OSU argues that associating alcohol with its “Buckeyes” identity could dilute the strength of its brand and create consumer confusion, potentially harming its financial interests and public image. This stance reflects the university’s commitment to safeguarding its intellectual property and maintaining control over its brand associations.
The Argument for Consumer Confusion
OSU’s legal challenge hinges on the argument that the “Buckeye Tears” trademark could mislead consumers into believing that the associated beer and liquor products are officially affiliated with or endorsed by the university. This claim is central to the university’s effort to protect its brand equity and prevent unauthorized commercial exploitation of its name and reputation. However, trademark attorney Josh Gerben offers a counterpoint, suggesting that the Ann Arbor location of The Brown Jug could actually weaken the consumer confusion argument. Gerben posits that consumers might perceive the mark as a “tongue-in-cheek nod to the Michigan rivalry” rather than an official university product.
Precedent and Similar Cases
The concept of “Buckeye Tears” is not entirely new in the realm of alcoholic beverages. In 2023, breweries owned by Penn State alumni released a limited-run IPA under the same name, demonstrating the potential appeal of such a product within the context of college sports rivalries. This prior use of the phrase, albeit in a different geographical and competitive context, could influence the legal proceedings and the ultimate decision regarding The Brown Jug’s trademark application.
Impact and Implications
The filing of the notice of opposition has transformed a long-standing athletic rivalry into a battle over intellectual property rights. The ongoing case means The Brown Jug’s trademark application is currently challenged, and the outcome remains uncertain. Should the restaurant expand its use of the mark to include university imagery or branding, Ohio State’s case could strengthen. This legal contest further extends the Ohio State-Michigan rivalry, which dates back to 1897, beyond the football field and into the realm of trademark law. The result will not only determine the fate of the “Buckeye Tears” trademark but may also set a precedent for future disputes involving collegiate brands and rivalries.
In conclusion, the Ohio State University’s fight against the “Buckeye Tears” trademark application underscores the importance of brand protection in the context of collegiate athletics. The legal battle highlights the complexities of trademark law, the potential for consumer confusion, and the financial implications of brand association. As the case unfolds, it serves as a reminder of the ongoing efforts to safeguard valuable intellectual property and maintain control over brand identity in a competitive marketplace.
