A Broward County ( Florida ) company known as Caneup LLC should be prohibited from using the word” Caneup” in business, according to a U.S. magistrate judge’s recommendation last Wednesday in response to a lawsuit brought by the University of Miami.
A permanent order against Caneup was suggested by Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein. She found Miami has established that Caneup, which has not defended itself, ought to be held liable for trademark infringement, cruel competitors and several other states but, as explained below, never liable for a state regarding national reputation. The proposal may become reviewed by U. S. District Judge Jose E. Martinez.
Miami has promoted its athletics program, sell clothing, and has used the words” Canes” and the orange and green” U” symbol for more than 50 years. According to Elfenbein, Miami has become so well-known that some people refer to it as” the U” even though it is n’t likely to be fans of Ohio State or Utah. Both trademarks have also been registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Miami’s well-known brand did n’t dissuade Caneup LLP from using” Caneup” beginning in 2014 or from applying to register” Caneup” with the USPTO in 2021 for use on clothing and apparel. Miami has opposed Caneup’s app, which as of this writing is still under concern. The text” U” is shown in green on the visual sample Caneup that was sent to the USPTO as “rendered in orange and green with a white line separating the two colors,” according to Elfenbein. An observer may observe the structure of the class.
Miami argues the depiction of” U” in the word” Caneup “—with” the exact colors as the University’s colors and U Design Marks” —is a ploy to imply an association with the school. Miami also says Caneup’s CEO admitted in “prior communications” that he had spent “years” working on the Caneup style with the school in mind, a place the college says shows an purposeful attempt to intrude.
Caneup’s visible avoidance of being served has even irked Miami, who has also expressed his frustration. The school claims it attempted to reach Caneup 11 times before the judge permitted Maimi to offer via email and certified mail. But as Elfenbein explains, Caneup did n’t answer the complaint, leading Miami to seek a motion for default judgment.
Elfenbein explained in detail why Miami crafted a strong case for mark violations. For one, before Caneup used Caneup, the school had used its signifies for more than 30 times. However, Caneup has used its title in business, including on products sold on Caneup’s web, without Miami’s assent. The judge also pointed out that Caneup appearing on products “is likely to cause consumer confusion” given that the word” Canes” and” Caneup” are “predominantly made up of the word’ Cane ‘ which—to sports fans at least —is heavily and instantly associated with the university”.

While Elfenbein urges Miami been granted definition wisdom on most of its works, there’s one matter where she found the college has not, at this point, made a satisfactory explanation.
Miami contends that brand dilution, which involves an alleged infringer using a well-known mark and thereby tarnishing its special quality, has caused it to suffer. The judge cited as examples that Budweiser beer and Barbie figurines are “limited to genuinely popular scars,” according to the judge.
Elfenbein was n’t persuaded that Canes and the U design were actually that well-known. She acknowledged there’s “little question” the signs are “well-known and well-recognized to sports enthusiasts throughout the United States” and they may “even be Barbie-level popular in South Florida”. But the judge clarified the signifies ‘ notoriety is “niche” in that they’re instantly common to many sports enthusiasts but not so much the “general taking people” unlike, the judge noted, Kodak or Buick.
Elfenbein added that other courts that evaluate sports marks have come to the same conclusion. A federal judge in Texas determined that the University of Texas athletics logo had niche notoriety among the American consuming public in a trademark dilution case involving the longhorn silhouette logo. Even though Longhorns football games are broadcast across the country and the school has a long-running program with numerous fans and supporters, that was accurate. The popularity of UT athletics” not necessarily mean that the longhorn logo is so ubiquitous and well-known to stand toe-toe-toe with Buick or Kodak,” according to U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel.
These cases are a good reminder that there’s sports fame and there’s real fame and, sometimes, the two are different.