- Journal Archives
- Volume 16
- Volume 15
- Volume 14
- Volume 13
- Volume 12
- Volume 11
- Volume 10
- Volume 9
- Volume 8
- Volume 7
- Volume 6
- Volume 5
- Volume 4
- Volume 3
- Volume 2
- Volume 1
I love monograms. Naturally I was intrigued when I learned that the monogram “RG3″ was the center of a recent trademark controversy. Two RG3′s are duking it out to see who can use RG3 for exclusive branding. Let’s meet the contenders:
- Robert Griffin III: born in Japan, this RG3 played college football at Baylor before becoming a quarterback for the Washington Redskins.
- Research Group 3: a biker favorite, this RG3 is well known in the extreme sports community for their motorcycle suspensions.
Research Group 3 has been in business since 1998, well before the Griffin began his professional athletic career. Trademark issues began last year when Griffin filed an application to trademark both “RGIII” and “RG3″ for use on athletic apparel and other merchandise. Naturally, Research Group 3 pushed back and opposed Griffin’s filings on the sets of initials they had been using for years. So far the conflict hasn’t gotten ugly and both parties seem to be working towards a cooperative solution. Some commentators think that solution is straightforward: let RG3 be the face of RG3!
This symbiotic relationship could be particularly well-suited to Research Group 3. The “RG3″ moniker has stuck to Griffin as his career has been on the rise, and his prospects continue to look up. With his professional skill, notoriety, and a generally positive reputation, association with Griffin could increase RG3′s visibility. This may also be the best way to allay Research Group 3′s concerns about branding confusion. If they do associate with RG3, they will not only have more press but it will also be clear that the RG3′s are separate entities. No one will wonder about their relationship; it will be obvious. And while it might otherwise have been cost-prohibitive for Research Group 3 to sign an endorsement deal with an NFL star, this situation may be different if the endorsement deal is part of a settlement that avoids costly litigation.
Recent Blog Posts
- Controlling the Uncontrollable: UK Taking the Driver’s Seat in Driverless Car Technology
- Obama’s Cybersecurity Executive Order: Private Sector Must Help Police the “Wild West”
- Qualcomm Settlement May Reconfigure the Smartphone Market in China
- Who Rightfully Owns the Village People’s YMCA?
- Internet Elections Regulation: Another Pie in the Partisan Food Fight?
- Great Artists Steal? A Music Theory Thought Experiment & a Worry about the Litigation of Popular Music
Tagsadvertising antitrust Apple books career celebrities contracts copyright copyright infringement courts creative content criminal law entertainment Facebook FCC film/television financial First Amendment games Google government intellectual property internet JETLaw journalism lawsuits legislation media medicine Monday Morning JETLawg music NFL patents privacy progress publicity rights radio social networking sports Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) technology telecommunications trademarks Twitter U.S. Constitution