A tapline at the Brown Jug in Ann Arbor shows the beer Buckeye Tears on Thursday, Sept. 4, 2025. The name is the source of a trademark dispute with Ohio State, spurring a bit of a surge in Michigan fans to seek the beer out. Credit: Jackie Smith/MLive via TNS
Ohio State’s trademark challenge over an Ann Arbor bar’s beer, named “Buckeye Tears,” can only work if the university sells its own brand of beer.
That is among the arguments filed on behalf of the Michigan bar, known as The Brown Jug, by a pair of attorneys who say they’re proud to offer their services free of charge.
The Brown Jug applied on Aug. 19, 2024 to trademark Buckeye Tears for beer and liquor. The university filed opposition documents Aug. 27 with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, arguing the name could confuse consumers into thinking Ohio State endorsed the product or was connected to it, per prior Lantern reporting.
Trademark lawyers Todd Gregorian and Eric Ball from Fenwick & West law firm took on the defense and are representing The Brown Jug pro bono.
“It seems to be a case where Ohio State is once again, being overly aggressive about trademark rights in a way that doesn’t really serve consumers,” Gregorian said. “Core to that here is the idea that no one’s really confused about thinking that Ohio State is selling ‘Buckeye Tears’ beers. They would never do that, right?”
Gregorian, a 2004 University of Michigan Law School graduate and former patron of the Brown Jug, said he saw the initial articles about the story and was happy to get into a fight “close to home,” and advocate for positions in trademark law that he believes in.
Ohio State Spokesperson Chris Booker said the university will let the trademark filing speak as the university’s comment on the case.
On Oct. 6, in papers filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Gregorian and Ball responded to Ohio State’s opposition of the trademark application.
“The Brown Jug’s Buckeye Tears mark is not likely to cause confusion with Ohio State’s marks,” the legal team wrote in their opposition. “The Brown Jug’s beer and spirits are unrelated to the goods and/or services designated by Ohio State’s purported Buckeyes mark. The parties use distinct channels of trade for their respective goods, and they sell to sophisticated and distinct purchasers.
In the same court filing, The Brown Jug mentioned other examples of liquor and beer brands with “buckeye” in the name, including nine photos of “buckeye” alcohols as evidence they are not synonymous with Ohio State.
Ball said in addition to supporting the Michigan side of the rivalry, they chose to take this case based on First Amendment precedents.
“The Supreme Court has overruled a number of statutes recently on the basis of, if someone is making this claim and saying ‘I don’t like you using this trademark because it hurts my ego, or its scandalous, or I just don’t like it’ opposed to ‘it’s creating confusion,’” Ball said. “That’s kind of what’s going on here.”
Ball said ultimately, they are just there to give The Brown Jug the “strongest D-Line we can and we’re hopeful for victory” referring to both the bar and The Game, played on Nov. 29.
Niko Porikos, son of The Brown Jug’s owner, said in an email that the trademark situation has increased business for the bar and the support from the Michigan community has been “incredible.”
“We would like to thank the OSU lawyers for bringing such a light to our business,” Porikos said. “We’d like to keep the rivalry fun—as it should be, played on fields, in stadiums and arenas, not in courtrooms.”
