Where, What, and How – Trademarks & the Olympic Games (Part 3)

Part 3: HOW

The 2024 Summer Olympic Games have ended, the 2024 Summer Paralympic Games have begun, and this article brings to a close our three-part series on Trademarks & the Olympic Games. In June, we reviewed from where the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC) derives its trademark rights, and in July we explored what trademarks the USOPC owns . This month, we wrap up our series by taking a look at how the USOPC enforced its trademark rights this summer by filing a lawsuit against Prime Hydration, LLC in the District of Colorado.

In a collaboration with basketball player Kevin Durant, Prime Hydration used the marks OLYMPIC, OLYMPIAN, TEAM USA, and GOING FOR GOLD on social media posts, on its website, and on its drink label, with no authorization from the USOPC. The company also allegedly distributed ad copy to stores and other third parties that prominently used these marks. At the time of publishing this article, it appears that the social media posts shown in the complaint have been taken offline, but some of the ad copy that uses the OLYMPIC marks is still displayed on third party websites.

In its lawsuit, the USOPC argues that it has exclusively licensed use of the OLYMPIC marks to Coca-Cola for beverages in the United States and that Prime Hydration’s unauthorized use of the OLYMPIC marks threatens the exclusivity of that agreement. Based on the information in the complaint, the USOPC first contacted Prime Hydration about its infringement on July 10, 2024, but the company continued its allegedly infringing activities; the complaint was filed on July 19, 2024. While filing a lawsuit nine days after sending a cease and desist letter would be considered speedy under normal circumstances, the USOPC needs to move quickly to police its marks and defend its intellectual property rights, especially leading up to and during the Olympic Games. Otherwise, the next time the Games come around, the Committee’s exclusive license agreements may not be worth nearly as much.

This case is still pending, but it may provide interesting guidance on the value placed on exclusive USOPC trademark licenses. We hope you enjoyed our summer series, where we explored some of the different circumstances that surround the USOPC’s intellectual property: where the Committee derived its rights from, what intellectual property the Committee owns, and how the Committee enforces its rights. As they say in Paris, à bientôt!