Trojans Strip Gamecocks of "SC" mark

[LMU]

Well, apparently Southern California did register it first. And South Carolina stopped using the initials for a decade, so they it's not surprising that it lost control of them.

According to the ruling, under trademark law three years of non-use constitutes abandonment. Use it or lose it. Which is why, the LA Times notes, that the Trojans make a limited production run of "Southern Cal" merchandise, even though they hate the nickname the way San Franciscans hate "Frisco." If they don't keep the trademark, then somebody else can register it.

And the article's graphic notwithstanding, this is the one that Southern California uses for baseball, which is what the Gamecocks were looking to register theirs for:

Much closer than the diagonal "SC" the trojans use elsewhere.

And the irony is... I went to junior high and high school with that pitcher!

[BRice16]

How come no one complains about the Mets and Yankees using almost the exact logo but with a color change and serifs? Or Ok State having an issue with Ohio State? Or Texas and Tennessee- they even both use orange!

I just don't understand how they can legally make this decision...I mean, the abbreviation of the state for South Carolina is...SC.

Texas and Tennessee actually did come to an accord back in the 90's over the interlocking "UT" that was virtually identical. Tennessee agreed to abandon use of the "UT" with the exception of baseball hats, uniforms, and merchandise. Texas agreed to abandon use of the block "T" on all items except for their baseball uniforms and caps.

The deal was brokered without legal action by CLC (now a part of IMG), who handled licensing for both schools and was having a great deal of trouble with vendors getting the marks confused. Both schools are able to use their previous marks for "throwback-style" merchandise, but each school has gone away from the "UT" marks, with Texas using the Longhorn as their primary, and Tennessee the "Power T"

[Gothamite]

Oh geez....If I were the University of Georgia...I'd watch my back...The Green Bay Packers had a bad week and might be looking to take their anger out on someone....That Bulldogs helmet logo looks awfully close to something we've seen before....

Georgia uses the logo under license from the Packers.

[LuvTheNats]

Oh geez....If I were the University of Georgia...I'd watch my back...The Green Bay Packers had a bad week and might be looking to take their anger out on someone....That Bulldogs helmet logo looks awfully close to something we've seen before....

Georgia uses the logo under license from the Packers.

Ok..I'm gonna chalk this up as inability to convey sarcasm through typing a message and call it a day....

[Gothamite]

To me, the Trojans are definitely wrong on this one. Give me a break. This is a perfect example of the courts and lawyers mucking up society. If the Trojans win, as others have noted, next it will be Ohio State vs Oklahoma State, and then hundreds of other colleges and universities that have the same letters. Then comes the high schools. You just can't do it.

It's not about teams using the same letters - it's about the Gamecocks trying to use an interlocking "SC" on their baseball caps similar to that of USC.

Once you read the decision, it actually makes a lot of sense.

[Cola]

Just curious...but South Carolina can continue to use the logo on uniforms, right? They just can't trademark it now? Does this mean anyone can get the vector of the logo and sell merchandise all they want to...or would you then be facing punishment from SoCal legal guys?

[Gothamite]

Oh geez....If I were the University of Georgia...I'd watch my back...The Green Bay Packers had a bad week and might be looking to take their anger out on someone....That Bulldogs helmet logo looks awfully close to something we've seen before....

Georgia uses the logo under license from the Packers.

Ok..I'm gonna chalk this up as inability to convey sarcasm through typing a message and call it a day....

Well, when people are thowing around "Ohio State vs Oklahoma State", your point wasn't much of a stretch....

That's why I usually use " " for sarcasm - I can't convey it through type alone, either.

[SJAnfield]

If USC had such a problem with South Carolina, why haven't they gone after Santa Clara? Santa Clara has a very similar interlocking SC, and they are in the same state!

[LMU]

If USC had such a problem with South Carolina, why haven't they gone after Santa Clara? Santa Clara has a very similar interlocking SC, and they are in the same state!

There was an agreement that Santa Clara changed their official initials from USC to SCU, where USC compensated by donating palm trees to line the main campus road.

Also why the SC in Santa Clara has the C above the S.

[LuvTheNats]

Oh geez....If I were the University of Georgia...I'd watch my back...The Green Bay Packers had a bad week and might be looking to take their anger out on someone....That Bulldogs helmet logo looks awfully close to something we've seen before....

Georgia uses the logo under license from the Packers.

Ok..I'm gonna chalk this up as inability to convey sarcasm through typing a message and call it a day....

Well, when people are thowing around "Ohio State vs Oklahoma State", your point wasn't much of a stretch....

That's why I usually use " " for sarcasm - I can't convey it through type alone, either.

Touche

[SJAnfield]

If USC had such a problem with South Carolina, why haven't they gone after Santa Clara? Santa Clara has a very similar interlocking SC, and they are in the same state!

There was an agreement that Santa Clara changed their official initials from USC to SCU, where USC compensated by donating palm trees to line the main campus road.

Also why the SC in Santa Clara has the C above the S.

Thanks for the clarification

[Still MIGHTY]

Why doesnt South Carolina just use the Gamecock logo and USC use the "SC" with "Trojans" over it or the Trojan logo instead of using wordmarks. It's on everything else isn't it? Why do the baseball teams need logos different from the rest of the school's sports?

Wouldn't that clear it up?

and honestly, even as a Trojan fan and prospective student, I've never really liked the Baseball "SC" compared to the usual "SC" or the Trojan

[RedEye]

The thing I don't like so much is you will never mistake one for the other. They are in completely different conferences and geographic area. The letter styles are completely different and other than interlocking you would NEVER think one is the other when it comes to merchandising.

Don't look at the misleading picture attached to the article - the point of dispute appears to be the baseball "SC", not the one in the picture.

They might be in a different area, but they each merchandise nationally. They compete at the same level of athletics, and they each receive national attention.

Oh, I know the reference in the first post isn't the same Southern Cal logo in dispute... still... The two styles (baseball logos)... other than the fact they interlock... are so different there is no way one school could be harmed by the other by way of confusion on a consumer's part. The national image and brand of each school is so opposite each other I don't see where there is a chance that USC can be harmed in any way. Another school overlapping 2 "T's" like Texas Tech in similar colors yes... but these two fonts don't resemble each other at all... their school's colors are not close... This is where I think the issue is a LITTLE overboard... are they similar in concept yes... but this is nit picking a bit in my opinion.. of course my opinion means squat in this dispute obviously and others will disagree... I just don't see a school like USC needing to defend it's marks against this particular mark.

I can see where USC is comign from but I also think they are taking it a LITTLE far in seeing harm or potential harm.

[Gothamite]

Read the decision, is all I can say. When they lay it out like that, it's hard to argue.

[-kj]

Legally, it's hard to argue.

I still think the only winners in something like this are the lawyers.

[Gothamite]

True enough, but you can say that about most things in life.

[fiasco!]

If USC had such a problem with South Carolina, why haven't they gone after Santa Clara? Santa Clara has a very similar interlocking SC, and they are in the same state!

There was an agreement that Santa Clara changed their official initials from USC to SCU, where USC compensated by donating palm trees to line the main campus road.

Also why the SC in Santa Clara has the C above the S.

dun dun dun, dun dun dun dun, tss

[FiddySicks]

The college I go to uses the SC on the left for just about every sport other than football, and from what I've heard they use it under license from South Carolina. I wonder if this could change that at all.

[Gothamite]

Don't know - the Gamecocks could still retain the right to use it in an other-than-Division-1A context. Haven't gotten that far in the decision.

[BallWonk]

Read the decision, is all I can say. When they lay it out like that, it's hard to argue.

As is often the case, there is a world of difference between whether a judicial decision is properly rendered and written and whether the application of the law is even remotely sensible or just. This is a pretty clear case where the judge's work is proper, but a clearly wrong outcome is nonetheless being imposed. (And the evidence put into the record and cited in the ruling offers more than sufficient support for a contrary ruling, had the court gone the other way.)

Furthermore, the last years of the Rhenquist Court saw a radical shift in federal jurisprudence among the states. If one applies the Rhenquist standards on state sovereignty, then there's really nothing that an arm of the state of California could do to compel an arm of the state of South Carolina to obey a decision in a federal court. The South Carolina legislature should just pass a state law granting its own university exclusive right to the use of the interlocking SC within South Carolina and then let the California school try to get the Roberts Court to rule against the cockpit of the Confederacy on a state sovereignty issue.