Straight Arrow News
The owners of the NHL’s Utah Mammoth filed a lawsuit against a hockey equipment manufacturer to settle a trademark dispute.
The Mammoth nearly became the Utah Yeti but the team could not come to a co-existence agreement with Yeti Coolers, LLC.
Unless the two parties can work out an agreement, a federal court judge in Utah may have to decide who has the right to the name.
It is becoming a mammoth headache for both sides. The NHL’s Utah Mammoth filed a federal lawsuit against a hockey equipment manufacturer to settle a trademark dispute over the team’s name.
The suit escalates the fight between the hockey club and Mammoth Hockey, a company that manufactures oversized equipment bags. The Oregon-based company sent a cease and desist letter to the team on June 10, claiming potential customers would confuse the two brands and fans of rival teams would not purchase its products.
Smith Entertainment Group filed the complaint Aug. 1 as a response to that letter. The team’s filing said their “use of the ‘Utah Mammoth’ trademark is fully compliant with relevant federal and state law, and not violative of any trademark rights defendant may possess.”
The NHL’s Mammoth, who moved from Arizona following the 2023 season, played as the Utah Hockey Club in 2024. They conducted a fan survey earlier this year to choose a permanent name that would reflect their new home. Mammoth was the runaway winner after several early choices were ruled out. Team owner Ryan Smith spoke about the chaotic process during the name unveiling on May 7.
“The process I probably wouldn’t recommend,” Smith said. “Not because I don’t believe in the voting of nearly a million people, but it’s changed a little where AI’s like, it’s not like they’re just voting with their numbers or their words — they’re now voting with images that are like no designer could ever develop. So, I actually think we leaned into that and we actually came up with something really cool.”
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
SEG had a trademark dispute during the fan voting as well. The name Utah Yeti was one of the final six choices, but the team could not come to a co-existence agreement with Yeti Coolers, LLC.
The Mammoth’s statement announcing their current lawsuit said, “Utah Mammoth and the NHL believe strongly that we have the right to use the name Utah Mammoth under federal and state law, and that our use will not harm the defendant or its business in any way.”
The team and the equipment company may share a name and operate in the same space, but their logos and colors do not closely resemble one another.
Mammoth Hockey co-founder Erik Olson told the Deseret News, “Mammoth Hockey intends to vigorously defend the litigation recently commenced against it and protect its longstanding trademark used in connection with the hockey goods it has manufactured and sold for the past 10 years.”
The bag manufacturer was the first party to use the trademark in commerce and would have “common law rights” to it. However, the legal filings said the company has no federally registered trademark for the name.
Unless the two parties can work out an agreement, a federal judge in Utah may have to decide which “Mammoth” has the right to the name.
The NHL’s Utah Mammoth took quite some time to find their unique moniker and months after the official unveiling, the saga is still not over. Team owners filed a lawsuit against a hockey equipment manufacturer earlier this month, to settle a trademark dispute.
The suit escalates the fight between the hockey club and Mammoth Hockey, a company that manufactures oversized equipment bags. The Oregon-based company sent a cease and desist letter to the team June 10 claiming potential customers would confuse the two brands and fans of rival teams would not purchase its products.
VIDEO OF THE JERSEY UNVEILING IS ON THE YOU TUBE LINK BELOW.
The NHL’s Mammoth, who moved from Arizona following the 2023 season, played as the Utah Hockey Club last year. They conducted a fan survey in January to choose a permanent name that would reflect their new home. Mammoth was the runaway winner after several early choices were ruled out. Team owner Ryan Smith spoke about the chaotic process during the name unveiling in May.
“The process I probably wouldn’t recommend. Not because I don’t believe in the voting of nearly a million people, but it’s changed a little where AI’s like it’s not like they’re just voting with their numbers or their words, like they’re now voting with images that are like no designer could ever develop. So, I actually think we leaned into that and we actually came up with something really cool.”
Smith Entertainment Group had a trademark dispute during the fan voting as well. The name Utah Yeti was one of the final six choices but the team could not come to a co-existence agreement with Yeti Coolers, LLC.
The Mammoth’s statement announcing their current lawsuit said,
“Utah Mammoth and the NHL believe strongly that we have the right to use the name Utah Mammoth under federal and state law, and that our use will not harm the defendant or its business in any way.”
The team and the equipment company may share a name and operate in the same space but their logos and colors do not closely resemble one another. Mammoth Hockey co-founder Erik Olson wrote in a statement,
“Mammoth Hockey intends to vigorously defend the litigation recently commenced against it and protect its longstanding trademark used in connection with the hockey goods it has manufactured and sold for the past 10 years.”
The bag manufacturer was the first party to use the trademark in commerce and would have “common law rights” to it, although according to the legal filings the company has no federally registered trademark for the name.
It has become a mammoth headache for both sides and unless the two parties can work out an agreement, a federal court judge in Utah may have to decide which “Mammoth” has the right to the name.
A trademark dispute between the NHL’s Utah Mammoth and Mammoth Hockey highlights the legal complexities sports teams face when branding and choosing names, with potential implications for other businesses and teams undergoing similar rebranding efforts.
The case centers on which business has legal rights to the 'Mammoth' name, demonstrating the challenges of trademark law in the context of sports rebranding and established businesses.
Both parties are concerned about confusion and the value of their branding, reflecting how crucial brand identity is for sports teams and companies operating in intersecting markets.
The story exemplifies how legal conflicts can arise when new sports teams rebrand and establishes the possible need for judicial intervention when co-existence agreements cannot be reached.
According to media bias experts at AllSides.
Perfect reliability rating, according to experts at NewsGuard
Finally, unbiased news that lets you see both sides. It’s refreshing to have facts without the spin.”
This app gives me the news without pushing a political agenda, which is rare to find.”
Unbiased news.
Directly to your inbox. Free!
Terms and Conditions
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy
|
Cookie Settings
©️ 2025 Straight Arrow News
Hockey News