Branding feud

The idea that UH should own rights to Sam Houston’s illustrious name is ludicrous.

One of the most interesting legends about the founding of our fair city is the tale of how this settlement on the banks of Buffalo Bayou came to be known as Houston. At a dinner party one evening Gen. Sam Houston, the hero of the battle of San Jacinto, proposed naming the city after his hostess, Charlotte Allen. But Allen, a shrewd businesswoman who’s never gotten the credit she deserves in our city’s history books, wisely convinced the general that the glory associated with his name would help put the fledgling city on the map.

Sam Houston agreed, because the man who won our state’s independence knew the value of his good name. Today we can’t help wondering what the general would think about somebody trying to claim exclusive rights to it.

Last year, University of Houston officials were understandably upset when they learned the South Texas College of Law planned to change its name to the Houston College of Law and adopt a color scheme that looked suspiciously similar to the Cougars’ red and white logo. UH sent its attorneys to the courthouse arguing that the downtown law school’s name change could have caused confusion, effectively diluting the good name built by the University of Houston Law School. A federal judge agreed.

Now, a mediated settlement of this legal dispute has opened the door to a much broader claim by UH. University officials included in the settlement a provision that will allow UH to pursue a federal trademark on the word “Houston” for educational purposes.

That prospect should raise the eyebrows and the blood pressure of anybody who’s ever attended Houston Baptist University, Houston Community College, the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston or even a nursery school whose moniker incorporates the name of our city. Indeed, both Houston Community College and the Houston Astros have put the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on notice that they may oppose UH’s attempted takeover of Sam Houston’s illustrious name.

Let there be no doubt that all sorts of institutions have good reason to defend the intellectual property associated with their appellations. Just Wednesday, Buc-ee’s, the wildly popular retail chain spreading like bluebonnets along Texas highways, filed suit in federal court against Buck’s, a Nebraska-based company that plans to open a half-dozen similarly named convenience stores in the Houston area.

And nobody could legitimately object to the University of Houston trademarking names and slogans that are distinctively associated with the school, like “Houston Cougars” or even “Phi Slama Jama.” But the idea that UH should own rights to the word “Houston,” even if only for educational purposes, is ludicrous.

Imagine if the University of Texas had been granted such broad ownership rights to the word “Texas” for educational purposes. Try selling that idea to the Aggies, to say nothing of every other educational institution whose title incorporates the name of our state. And if you carry the logic of this cockamamie idea to the private sector, the Astros could claim the exclusive right to name a sports team after our city then sue the Rockets and the Texans for trademark infringement.

We hope this notion of UH trademarking “Houston” is just the product of some lawyer’s over-active imagination. Charlotte Allen understood that our city’s name was a valuable commodity. The University of Houston needs to understand that Gen. Sam Houston’s name belongs to all of us.