As athletes increasingly seek to monetize personal brands beyond the field, jersey numbers are now driving ventures such as restaurants, apparel lines and licensing deals. But such business ventures are not without risk. The recent trademark lawsuit targeting Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce over their “1587” restaurant brand — named by combining their jersey numbers — highlights a growing and critically important issue in modern sports business: Who, if anyone, owns a number once it leaves the game and begins functioning like a brand? How can athletes build a strong brand around their jersey numbers when the pool of available numbers is inherently limited?
The number is the brand
As professional athletes increasingly build off‑field brands around their identities, jersey numbers have evolved from functional identifiers to commercial assets — assets that can be surprisingly difficult to protect and that can cause unexpected off-field brand collisions. But an athlete does not automatically have rights in their own jersey number, and popularity and on-field success do not necessarily generate trademark rights in the number.
Trademarks are a common business tool for creating and protecting a brand as an intellectual property asset. Under U.S. trademark law, ownership usually goes to whoever uses a brand first in commerce. Early use can create enforceable rights, and taking proactive steps like formally filing with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) can strengthen those rights and reduce the risk of future conflicts. In the U.S., a trademark application can be filed even before using the mark via an Intent-to-Use application.
Given that the pool of jersey numbers is inherently limited and widely used across different sports, it can be very difficult for any single athlete to claim exclusive trademark rights to a number standing alone. Jersey numbers are also more challenging to protect as trademarks because a number can be used in many ways that do not inherently signal a particular brand. As a result, jersey numbers standing alone are often considered weaker trademarks unless they become strongly associated with a particular athlete or business, such as the name of an apparel line or restaurant, and not just ornamentally on a jersey.
There have been a number of high‑profile disputes involving Lamar Jackson, Dale Earnhardt Jr. and Troy Aikman, who all laid claim to the No. 8, even though other legends have worn this number. Jackson, jersey No. 8 for the Baltimore Ravens and owner of the ERA 8 brand, filed an opposition against a company associated with Dale Earnhardt Jr. that used No. 8 on his race car. The dispute was eventually settled with Earnhardt Jr. changing the stylization of his 8 logo.
The trajectory of a trademark dispute can be very different depending on the facts and the personalities involved. Even legend status does not guarantee ownership of a number.
Number scarcity
Anyone who has tried to clear a trademark knows it can feel like all the words are taken. A 2018 Harvard Law Review article found that desirable trademarks are increasingly scarce. Athletes wishing to protect their numbers are limited by league rules to a limited dataset. Also, with the MLB having retired No. 42 for all teams in tribute to Jackie Robinson, the NBA having retired No. 6 for Bill Russell and teams having retired multiple numbers for their iconic legends, there are even fewer numbers to choose from.
This scarcity, however, does not always translate to a good business decision. In fact, the more strongly a number is associated with one particular athlete, the harder it often can be for the next generation to stand out with that number. Choosing one with minimal legacy associations can offer broader ownership opportunities.
How to be more than just another ‘number’
Establishing and protecting trademark rights requires deliberate planning with the future in mind. In trademark law, the party who used the mark first is said to have “priority” and usually prevails in related disputes. One of the most common methods to establish priority is using the mark in U.S. commerce (for example, selling or shipping products under the mark in the United States), which can create rights even without obtaining a federal trademark registration at the USPTO. Savvy athletes should file Intent-to-Use applications as early as possible to get an earlier constructive use date and establish priority even before making significant use of the mark.
Before adopting or applying for a trademark, a trademark search can reveal other marks that may impact the capability to use or register a mark. Having advanced knowledge of potentially conflicting marks can significantly help in deciding whether to file for a trademark and inform the filing strategy.
For athletes and brands looking to leverage the value of their identity, creative mark designs and stylization can play a critical role in avoiding trademark disputes and increase the chances of obtaining a registration, as is the case with NBA star Penny Hardaway’s Nike logo that combined his jersey number, 1, with a play on his name.
Another option is to get creative like Chad Johnson, formerly Chad Ochocinco. Ochocinco wore jersey No. 85 and used the Spanish translation of his numerals as a way to build a distinctive identity. Other athletes have been able to build successful brands by combining their numbers and initials or nicknames, like Chris Paul’s CP3, Cristiano Ronaldo’s CR7, and Carmelo Anthony’s Melo M3. Combination marks are easier to register and enforce, especially considering that there could be multiple athletes in the same sport on different teams with the same number.
Athletes and businesses seeking to build a brand around a jersey number should evaluate how to best differentiate themselves. Selecting distinctive logos, design elements or brand names can be a sound way to strengthen brand enforcement potential from the outset. For those thinking long term, even jersey number selection itself can be approached strategically and a savvy, brand-focused player may want to get creative starting at jersey number selection as part of a long-term brand strategy.
Jonathan Hyman is a partner at Knobbe Martens and serves as co-chair of the firm’s Advertising, Media & Entertainment practice. Jonathan Menkes is a partner at Knobbe Martens and co-chairs the firm’s Sports & Gaming Law practice. Edward Nester is an associate at Knobbe Martens.
