How One Family Killed the Sturgis Trademark
Fastest Way
3,295 views
In June 2011, a family souvenir shop in Rapid City was told it could no longer
print one word on a T-shirt. The word was Sturgis — the name of the town.
A nonprofit formed by the Sturgis chamber of commerce and two of the largest
businesses at the rally registered the word "Sturgis" as a federal trademark in
February 2011. Four months later it sued Rushmore Photo & Gifts, a Rapid City
company that had been in business since 1937, along with Wal-Mart.
What followed took eight years. A federal jury awarded $912,500. A judge vacated
it. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals then found the STURGIS word mark had
never acquired secondary meaning and was invalid. In February 2019 a federal
judge ruled the terms Sturgis, Sturgis Rally & Races and Sturgis Motorcycle Rally
do not infringe — when used by the defendants, or by anyone else.
This is the full story of who owns Sturgis, from Pappy Hoel and nine racers on a
dirt track in 1938, to the artist who gave the rally its emblem for free, to the
eight-year federal case almost nobody talks about.
Sources include the Eighth Circuit opinion in Sturgis Motorcycle Rally, Inc. v.
Rushmore Photo & Gifts, Inc. (Nos. 17-1762, 17-1869, 17-2712, 17-2731) and the
District of South Dakota docket, CIV 11-5052.
CHAPTERS
0:00 The letter
1:35 1938: nine racers on a dirt track
6:08 The man who gave the rally its emblem
9:06 From a drawing to the words themselves
11:15 The opponents who became the owners
13:48 The family that refused to sign
17:00 The Connecticut question
18:46 Four years, and a shot glass
21:38 Can anyone own the name of a town?
27:46 What the court actually said
More from the STURGIS (1938–2026) series: [https://www.youtube.com/show/VLPLSX61...]
#Sturgis #SturgisMotorcycleRally #HarleyDavidson
Copyright Disclaimer: Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. No copyright infringement intended. ALL RIGHTS BELONG TO THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS
3 Comments
How One Family Killed the Sturgis Trademark
Fastest Way
3,295 views
In June 2011, a family souvenir shop in Rapid City was told it could no longer
print one word on a T-shirt. The word was Sturgis — the name of the town.
A nonprofit formed by the Sturgis chamber of commerce and two of the largest
businesses at the rally registered the word "Sturgis" as a federal trademark in
February 2011. Four months later it sued Rushmore Photo & Gifts, a Rapid City
company that had been in business since 1937, along with Wal-Mart.
What followed took eight years. A federal jury awarded $912,500. A judge vacated
it. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals then found the STURGIS word mark had
never acquired secondary meaning and was invalid. In February 2019 a federal
judge ruled the terms Sturgis, Sturgis Rally & Races and Sturgis Motorcycle Rally
do not infringe — when used by the defendants, or by anyone else.
This is the full story of who owns Sturgis, from Pappy Hoel and nine racers on a
dirt track in 1938, to the artist who gave the rally its emblem for free, to the
eight-year federal case almost nobody talks about.
Sources include the Eighth Circuit opinion in Sturgis Motorcycle Rally, Inc. v.
Rushmore Photo & Gifts, Inc. (Nos. 17-1762, 17-1869, 17-2712, 17-2731) and the
District of South Dakota docket, CIV 11-5052.
CHAPTERS
0:00 The letter
1:35 1938: nine racers on a dirt track
6:08 The man who gave the rally its emblem
9:06 From a drawing to the words themselves
11:15 The opponents who became the owners
13:48 The family that refused to sign
17:00 The Connecticut question
18:46 Four years, and a shot glass
21:38 Can anyone own the name of a town?
27:46 What the court actually said
More from the STURGIS (1938–2026) series: [https://www.youtube.com/show/VLPLSX61...]
#Sturgis #SturgisMotorcycleRally #HarleyDavidson
Copyright Disclaimer: Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. No copyright infringement intended. ALL RIGHTS BELONG TO THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS