Boston Professional Hockey Association, Inc. v. Dallas Cap & Emblem Mfg., Inc.
510 F.2d 1004 (1975)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The unauthorized reproduction and sale of a registered trademark as a standalone product, such as an embroidered emblem, constitutes trademark infringement under the Lanham Act because the mark's value is derived from the owner's goodwill and its use is likely to cause confusion as to sponsorship or approval.
Facts:
- The National Hockey League (NHL) and its member teams (plaintiffs) adopted and widely publicized distinctive team symbols.
- These symbols were viewed by millions of fans at games, on television, and in various media, becoming strongly associated with the teams.
- The NHL authorized an exclusive agent, NHLS, which in turn granted an exclusive license to Lion Brothers Company to manufacture embroidered emblems with the team symbols.
- Dallas Cap & Emblem Manufacturing, Inc. (defendant) unsuccessfully sought a license from NHLS to produce the emblems.
- Despite being denied a license, Dallas Cap manufactured and sold approximately 24,603 embroidered emblems that were substantial duplications of the plaintiffs' team symbols.
- Dallas Cap deliberately reproduced the marks, intending for consumers to recognize them as the teams' symbols and purchase them to show allegiance to the teams.
Procedural Posture:
- The National Hockey League and thirteen of its member teams sued Dallas Cap & Emblem Manufacturing, Inc. in federal district court.
- The complaint alleged federal trademark infringement under the Lanham Act and common law unfair competition.
- The district court (trial court) denied the plaintiffs' claims for Lanham Act relief.
- The district court found that the defendant had engaged in unfair competition but granted only limited relief, requiring a disclaimer notice on the emblems.
- The plaintiffs appealed the district court's judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the unauthorized manufacture and sale of embroidered emblems that are exact duplications of a professional sports team's registered trademark, intended to be sold as standalone patches, constitute trademark infringement under the Lanham Act?
Opinions:
Majority - Roney, Circuit Judge
Yes, the unauthorized manufacture and sale of embroidered emblems duplicating a team's trademark constitutes infringement under the Lanham Act. The court's reasoning has several parts. First, the emblems are 'goods,' and applying the teams' marks to them constitutes a use 'in connection with the sale of goods' under § 1114 of the Lanham Act. The fact that the trademark symbol covers the entire product does not change this; the mark is the 'triggering mechanism' for the sale. Second, the 'likelihood of confusion' requirement is met. This confusion is not about the source of the emblem's manufacture but rather stems from the public's certain knowledge that the symbol's origin is the team. By selling a duplication of the mark, the defendant allows the public to associate the product with the team, thereby trading on the goodwill and recognition the team has built. The 1962 amendment to the Lanham Act broadened the confusion analysis beyond just the 'source of origin' of the goods. Finally, the court rejected the argument that the symbols were 'functional,' distinguishing this case from those involving utilitarian product designs, because here the symbol's value is not aesthetic but is derived entirely from its significance as a team's trademark.
Analysis:
This decision was a landmark case for merchandising rights, establishing that a trademark can be infringed even when it is sold as the product itself, rather than being used to identify the source of a different product. It significantly broadened the concept of 'likelihood of confusion' to include confusion about sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement, not just confusion about the physical manufacturing source. This interpretation gave trademark owners, particularly in sports and entertainment, powerful legal tools to control the commercial use of their logos on merchandise. The case effectively created the legal foundation for the modern, multi-billion dollar licensed sports apparel and memorabilia industry by protecting the commercial value of team symbols.
Unlock the full brief for Boston Professional Hockey Association, Inc. v. Dallas Cap & Emblem Mfg., Inc.