Originally Posted by bhusc2002
I'm curious as to why you decided to leave this line un-bolded:
Do you think a school should be able to stop others from using that term in reference to their fan base, just because the school's fans used it first (assuming that is true)? This sort of thing has nothing to do with the purposes of trademark law and protection. No one is confused about the source of origin of some consumer product in an instance like this. This sort of litigation concerns so-called trademark dilution, which attempts to extend trademark protection well beyond any reasonable understanding of the law's purpose. See the Victor's Little Secret case for a really dumb example. Luckily, the Supreme Court dealt a blow to these "dilution" cases and ruled against Victoria's Secret in that case. But, that is why some trademark holders insist that they need to sue everyone for every single use of the mark lest they lose it. They are worried about the term becoming generic. But, so what if it does? It isn't like the 12th man operates to inform consumers about the source of origin of some product. It is just a nickname for a group of people who make nothing, sell nothing, and do nothing other than cheer as a group. It isn't a product brand connected with consumer good will or anything.