USC and USC
Get ‘em while they last: The University of South Carolina is losing its right to use the “SC” logo.
Updated August 8, 2008 at 5:10 pm; Originally filed August 8, 2008 at 4:13 am by Ken Hawkins in , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Trojans strip Gamecocks of 'SC' mark

Update 5:03 p.m.: We called the University of South Carolina’s Director of Communications, Russ McKinney and he said that although the lawyers are still going through the 93-page ruling, it won’t necessarily stop the school from using the logo on the baseball uniforms, and it perhaps won’t even impede it from selling hats with the mark or collecting royalties.

What does it mean? Our state’s school can’t trademark the logo, and that, push come to shove, the California school has more “right” to it.

Not exactly the best position to be in, but it’s still better than not being able to use it at all. And, the schools have been able to live-and-let-live on the “USC” designation in the past (more on that in the original post).

Also, as we type this up we noticed The State has a story saying much the same thing.

Original post: The University of Southern California has been ruled to have more legal right than the University of South Carolina to use the “SC” logo. (The decision does not affect the “USC” logo.)

The decision comes from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

The hat above depicts South Carolina’s baseball logo, which the appeal board decided was legally identical to California’s (right). The board says the marks cause confusion and both schools can’t have it.


Here’s the 93-page ruling for your reading pleasure.Why does California get it? They had the (official) trademark first and South Carolina was trying to get it revoked, to which the board said:

Any rights in “SC” Carolina might have had prior to 1982 were abandoned due to Carolina’s nonuse of “SC” between 1982 and 1991. [Page 91]

If you’re thinking the fact that the State of South Carolina uses “SC” everywhere and that should serve as precedent, so did the University of South Carolina, but the court was unswayed:

The parties have stipulated that “SC” is the official state abbreviation assigned by the United States Postal Service to the state of South Carolina; that the state of South Carolina is referred to on maps by the abbreviation “SC”; that various South Carolina state agencies use “SC” as part of their agency acronyms; that the state’s official website uses the letters “SC” as part of its Internet address …

We find that all of these uses of “SC” by the state would be perceived by relevant purchasers not as trademarks or service marks, but as purely informational references to the state itself. [Page 90]

The ruling came August 1, and was the result of the November 15 hearing.

Oh, and incase you were wondering why this doesn’t affect the “USC” logo, and why both schools use it, the two schools have an agreement dating back to August of 1981, saying in part:

1. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA shall not object and hereby consents to the use by SOUTH CAROLINA or its licensees, distributors or other lawful designees of the designation USC on and in connection with educational and related services as well as consumer products of varying description. …

2. SOUTH CAROLINA shall not object and hereby consents to the use by SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA or its licensees, distributors or other lawful designees of the designation USC on and in connection with educational and related services as well as consumer products of varying description. … [Page 40]

A Los Angeles Times blogger details some of the (many) other conflicting branding problems the two schools share.

I may be a Clemson graduate, but you South Carolina fans have my sympathy today. But it’ll be long gone by the start of football.

More coverage

Printer-friendly version

56 comments on this post

August 8th, 2008
1:09 am

Where in California was the hearing held?

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
1:48 am

To the best of my knowledge they’re all held in Alexandria, Virginia. link

— Posted by Ken Hawkins (a site editor).
August 9th, 2008
12:02 am

California Judicial System says Michael Jackson is just misunderstood and OJ is innocent. So of course South Carolina cant use either S as an abbreviation for South or C for Carolina. Why that would be crazy.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
6:50 am

South Carolina shamelessly ripped that design off from Charleston Southern anyway, so it’s karmic justice that a court has forbidden them to use it anymore.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
8:57 am

And how long has Charleston Southern been in existence by that name?

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
9:29 am

Please show me a picture of that old Charleston Southern hat that So Car stole.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
6:18 pm

Charleston Southern was Baptist College until the 90s. Go back to your fountain of misinformation.

— Posted by Guest.
August 15th, 2008
4:54 am

Ripped off my foot. Its just southern cal being insecure since their former star player is under the microscope. They need to go back to buying off players and trying to look innocent it suited them!

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
8:56 am

Well, thanks for the sympathy. And we wouldn’t have it any other way by the time football season starts. :)

And to the above poster: Did Charleston Southern rip the logo off of Southern Cal or did they just blindly start using it?

LJN

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
9:15 am

LMAO!!! Dumb Cocks!!

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
9:47 am

football has not even started and the coots are 0-1

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
10:01 am

The University of South Carolina was established before California was a STATE! Since we use the logo primarily in baseball, how about we get our boys on the field versus your boys and slug it out?

2nd rate of a school? Check your facts buddy. Just because you have “uppity” alumni tossing money at the feet of Southern Cal administration, doesn’t give you the title of a first-rate school.

In the South (where football is king), the only thing people know of Southern Cal is that they won a couple National Championships and are lucky due to the fact that they could never compete in the SEC where real football is played. Pac-10 is a joke.

— Posted by Guest.
August 9th, 2008
2:16 am

Uh, South Carolina College originated before USC, but USC was founded as a university (1880) well before South Carolina College became one through state charter in 1906.

Feel free to use SCC or a big garnet “C” on your baseball hats.

USC does an excellent job of both establishing and protecting trade and service marks for the University of Southern California brand; South Carolina, not so much. USC has a model internal department controlling all its licensing and trademarks unlike most universities which have signed away many of their rights to outside vendors.

South Carolina’s ongoing search and capricious efforts t o establish a brand identity clearly didn’t help it in its arguments for the rights to use “SC” and more specifically the “SC” interlock which are highly restricted trademarks and identities of the University of Southern California sports programs.

Losing in court is one thing, but South Carolina long ago lost the battle in the court of public opinion the right to use SC and USC as service marks for their university.

I can’t wait for the upcoming battle between the Tarheels and the Gamecocks for the rights to the “Carolina” brand, service marks, and trademarks.

— Posted by Guest.
August 12th, 2008
12:16 am

I don’t see why there is a conflict at all. The SC in California is a top rated university (according to US News and World Report) while the SC in South Carolina is a typical SEC glorified high school. The same holds for Carolina. The Carolina in North Carolina is a top-rated university academically (US News) while the Carolina in South Carolina is a high school. So what’s the problem??

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
10:29 am

This Clemson grad laughs again at the Gamecocks.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
11:50 am

Gamecock grad laughing at your women beater university

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
6:15 pm

typical clemson douche

— Posted by Guest.
August 11th, 2008
8:25 am

Why don’t you go jet skiing with the Clemson coaches? Might be fun for you.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
10:32 am

The two SC logos are no where near similar, other than the fact that they contain the same letters. This is absolutely pathetic on the part of Southern Cal.

I’m guessing we’re going to see a mess of other schools going to court over their abbreviations…Oklahoma State and Ohio State, Texas and Tennessee, Fresno State and Florida State…

What a joke.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
10:51 am

…and for a Clemson fan to use this as yet another rebuke on our fine state University is just pathetic.

Clemson can’t do anything but beat the Gamecocks, and their coach cries on National television. Enjoy another year of mediocrity Tiglets!

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
10:56 am

“This Clemson grad laughs again at the Gamecocks.”

LSU will now sue Clemson over the name “Death Valley”

And by the way, how’s that job on the garbage truck workin’ out for ya Clemson Grad?

— Posted by Guest.
August 9th, 2008
1:35 pm

Clemson had the name “Death Valley” first. LSU changed their name from “Deaf Valley” to “Death Valley” long after Frank Howard had left his mark.

So I guess YOU are the one who is working on a garbage truck, because all of your arguments are trash

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
11:03 am

Charleston Southern wasn’t even established until the 60’s, so how can you say that USC ripped it off. Go to a real school. Also, SoCal having a monopoly on the SC abbriviation is like Paris Hilton trying to get the phrase “that’s hot” trademarked. It’s a joke that I could only expect to come out of California. If they get SC then South Carolina should get exclusive use of USC.

…also, is this really were all our tax money (and tuition) goes?

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
11:06 am

SC has continuous use in some form or fashion since 1801

That decision will be appealed, overturned and likely reversed. So Cal better get to the table quick to iron out an agreement because they will likely loose on appeal once some sanity is but in place.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
11:39 am

Kinda of a crappy design anyway…

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
11:57 am

this is bogus south caroilina is the original sc and so cal shouldnt be able to take that, talk about some california bias i wonder how much so cal’s rich alumni paid them for it

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
12:03 pm

South Carolina….LOSERS….They can’t win in football, what makes them think they can win in court?

Clemson Fan The only school in South Carolina!

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
12:08 pm

South Carolina Shamecocks….LOSERS! They can’t even win in football, what makes them think they could win in court?

Clemson Fan,

The only school in South Carolina!

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
6:24 pm

forgot to add “founded by racist rednecks.”

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
12:22 pm

Would you really want to compare the 2 schools? It is one thing to compare them in terms of football, but to beg for a chance to slug it out on the field? LMAO. You have to be kidding. Tell ya what, watch the Virgina game and see if you want any part of the real USC. Why dont you go down the road to your SEC brethren in Auburn and Arkansas and ask how they feel USC would do against the mighty SEC.

Got a clue for you -USC beat Arkie by a combined total of 120-34 and shut Auburn out at Auburn 23-0.

Lastly, USC is a great school not because of rich alumni, but great education. Check out any college ranking system of academics to see how far below USC that South Carolina is. There is no single measure by which South Carolina is as good a school on any front at the real USC.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
4:34 pm

I guess the fact that our baseball team is far and away better than SoCal’s, the fact that we have the number 1 international business program in the nation or the fact that we are now one of the top 10 research colleges is in no way comparable to the mighty SoCal. Give me a break. Tell you what why don’t you go back to bribing your college athletes.

Oh and for all those wondering, the last time our two football teams met on the field, South Carolina won a decisive 38-14. And I would welcome the chance to slap another beatdown on those overrated Trojans. Nice win against Stanford last year too… Oh wait…

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
12:26 pm

Don’t forget Oregon State in that Ok State/Ohio State discussion.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
12:32 pm

this is a load of BS. Southern Cal is a joke.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
2:40 pm

You’re a joke! Go Tigers!! CU in November.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
1:14 pm

I believe, the above poster was suggesting that the two teams engage in a game of baseball not football as the football team does not use this logo at South Carolina. Also in that particular sport I believe the University of South Carolina could wage a very competitive game with the University of Southern California. At any rate to fight over a logo whose only similarities to the University of Southern California’s logo is that it contains the same letters is just silly. First if you notice the University of South Carolina’s colors are garnet and black, not cardinal and yellow. Second, The font of the two logos are completely different. In addition to that the overlapping of the letters is vertical similar to the New York Yankees in South Carolina’s logo and obviously diagonal in the University of Southern California. If someone confuses these logos they obviously have more problems than identifying the merchandise of a school. This is quite possibly the most petty lawsuit I have ever seen also the official record of the two schools playing head to head in football is 1-1. Thank you for playing and good night.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
1:21 pm

SC is Southern Cal. A highly rated institution founded by a Protestant, Catholic and Jew (together). The trojans epitimize the pageantry and tradition of college football. It’s not hard to appreciate that.

My Gamecock brethren, I’m a USC grad ‘93, I for one think the Block “C” should be our preeminent logo as it is set’s us apart.

We are CAROLINA.

Gamecock in Texas.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
2:08 pm

AWESOME. ANOTHER loss fo rthe DUMBCOCK nation. Can’t happen to a better bunch of individuals. I’m lovin it.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
2:40 pm

Amazingly,

I reviewed the 93 page “decision” and by its own words totally ignored history and use of SC to describe SC for eons as inconsequential and of no value. Further that So. Cal using SC in some or any variation from 97 forward held more value than SC since 1801.

The individuals that wrote the decision should step back from the trees and see the forest.

Essentially, they are writing that So. Cal has “any variant” of SC monopolized. And that is stupid.

Shameful.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
2:44 pm

I feel sorry for the intelligent SEC fans by the way the incredibly ignorant portion of your fan base spouts off on these message boards. SEC fans are some of the best fans in sports, but some of your posters are just plain stupid. First off, all this complaining of who is older, who is more important, etc., etc. Did you guys catch the ruling whereas The Gamers lost the right to use SC since they stopped using it in the 80’s? This will sound insulting to the intelligent grads but…….Are there any entrance requirements for SEC schools? Seems like it’s harder to get into Arizona State than a SEC school. SEC’s intelligent fans are a blast to chat with however,the Jethro’s are just plain annoying. Go play your dualing banjos somewhere else and let the real sports fans discuss sports.

— Posted by Guest.
August 11th, 2008
10:57 am

So, SC stopped being SC in the 1980’s? When did that happen and on what planet? Certainly not this one?

SC has continuously used SC in commerce and trade for decades.

Its idiotic to conclude otherwise.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
3:15 pm

I certainly hope this is appealed as the decision is nonsense

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
5:33 pm

LOL… and Carolina = NORTH Carolina

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
6:22 pm

Carolina 21 - UNC 15…Our pethetic excuse for a team last year beat the tar-holes in that crummy little a-she-she stadium…Chapel Hole was a sad tailgating and football venue.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
6:00 pm

This whole thing doesnt matter, The baseball team will keep wearing what they have been wearing, it’s not going to change. How many teams in college have the same initials? It’s all bull crap anyway and will blow over.

PS: wasnt Chaleston Southern called Baptist College until the 90s?

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
6:02 pm

Anytime the Trojans want to strap it up with Auburn again we will be more than ready. Maybe we’ll get to see you in the championship game this year as everyone knows you didn’t want any part of us after the 2004 season!!

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
7:07 pm

I see a couple moronic SEC fans, flaming Southern California for the ruling in this case. I suggest you idiots read the article a little more closely. It was South Carolina who started the lawsuit! Southern California already had the trademark, and it was the greedy, unsophisticated, backwards morons from South Carolina that brought the case into court. The Trojans didn’t bring the suit to get the trademark, we’ve had the trademark for over 25 years. You South Carolina idiots tried to revoke our trademark, and got shot down. Deal with it, and try to come up with original ideas instead of copying the university with the greatest athletic history of any in this country.

“Why does California get it? They had the (official) trademark first and South Carolina was trying to get it revoked, to which the board said: Any rights in “SC” Carolina might have had prior to 1982 were abandoned due to Carolina’s nonuse of “SC” between 1982 and 1991. [Page 91]”

— Posted by Guest.
August 11th, 2008
11:02 am

“Carolina’s nonuse of “SC” between 1982 and 1991” Thats the part I don’t get.

Why not just as easily say, So Cal hadn’t used it from 1988-2006? And lost it from none use? Then ignore all the evidence to the contrary? Sure, there may be a picture or two, an article, even some ones’ memory. But can you really prove it? Nope, too bad.

Idiots.

— Posted by Guest.
August 8th, 2008
7:37 pm

SC gladly excepts your challenge. Tubs wanted non of us, even when we won the national championship and Auburn had a perfect season.. University of Southern California is the nation of domination in football, the courtroom, and in national championships so split SEC KOOKS!

— Posted by Guest.
August 9th, 2008
12:51 am

South Carolina

Total NCAA Team Championships: 1 men’s championships: 0 women’s championships: 1 coed championships: 0

Breakdown by Sport: women’s outdoor track & field: 1

---------------------------------------

Southern California

Total NCAA Team Championships: 84 + 11 Football Championships = 95 men’s championships: 73 women’s championships: 11 coed championships: 0

Breakdown by Sport: men’s football: 11 men’s baseball: 12 women’s basketball: 2 women’s golf: 1 men’s gymnastics: 1 men’s swimming & diving: 9 women’s swimming & diving: 1 men’s tennis: 16 women’s tennis: 2 men’s indoor track & field: 2 men’s outdoor track & field: 26 women’s outdoor track & field: 1 men’s volleyball: 4 women’s volleyball: 3 men’s water polo: 3 women’s water polo: 1

------------------------------

Academics -- Top National Universities 2008 US News: 27. University of Southern California 112. University of South Carolina—Columbia (Out of 124 national universities)

South Carolina was founded in 1801 and it’s slowly climbing up the ranks in academics and sports.

Note to myself: Don’t hire anyone from the South Carolina!

— Posted by Guest.
August 9th, 2008
1:17 am

Where did my post go? Here’s a summary.

US News 2008 National Universities: Top Schools 27=University of Southern California; 112=University of South Carolina—Columbia *

National championships -- www.ncaa.org Southern California=95 (84 NCAA + 11 Football); South Carolina=1

You are a disappointment and don’t deserve a share of the SC logo! In fact, give up the USC logo as well since you bring us shame.

New logo: SCC (not to be confused with a real SEC school)

— Posted by Guest.
August 10th, 2008
10:54 am

Southern Cal can’t have it both ways and we’re the original!

— Posted by Guest.
August 10th, 2008
11:48 am

The Southern California hat that is displayed is not the one with the conflict. The baseball team wears a hat with the S and C interlocking in the same way as the Gamecocks’ hat, but in a different font and cardinal and gold. http://www.uscbookstore.com/product_info.php?products_id=4104

— Posted by Guest.
August 11th, 2008
12:22 pm

And now they’ll try to claim the name Carolina knowing good and well that no one other than their ridiculous fans call them Carolina . Here’s an idea…How bout Mouth Carolina.

— Posted by Guest.
August 11th, 2008
1:06 pm

I guess they could use “Little Caroina”, or even better “Little Cocks”! LOL

— Posted by Guest.
August 12th, 2008
10:53 pm

Clemson is a sorry school, and I am an alumnus. The football players don’t have to go to class, they find new tennis shoes, cash, and whatever else in their lockers, and many times players are busted breaking the law and it gets swept under the rug… I’ve seen it with my own eyes…

I was completely disgusted at the classes I took - they did very little to educate me - and I am ashamed I graduated from a sorry university like Clemson…

If I could get a refund, I would.

— Posted by Guest.
August 20th, 2008
3:04 pm

Thanks for your input…but no one cares what you think.

— Posted by Guest.

Post your comment

Required.
Optional. Will be hidden.
Your comment will be reviewed, and will generally be posted if it is on topic and not viewed as abusive. To see your comment appear more quickly, we highly recommend creating an account before posting.
Do you want an e-mail when someone replies?
8 + 11 =
Sorry, we have to check if you're human.