Use of logo, trademark and brand
<p>Let's say <strong>X</strong> develops an app that tracks injuries of players who play in the NFL...</p>
<h1>Questions</h1>
<blockquote>
<ol>
<li><p>Can <strong>X</strong> legally name the app <em><strong>NFL Injury Tracker</strong></em>? (...without infringing on any trademarks, etc.?)</p>
</li>
<li><p>What restrictions would there be on <strong>X</strong>'s use of the NFL logo in the app's marketing materials?</p>
</li>
<li><p>What if <strong>X</strong> uses a logo slightly resembling the NFL logo but is not the same as the NFL logo?</p>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/DckUb.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/DckUb.jpg" alt="NFL Logo" /></a></p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/VDC07.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/VDC07.jpg" alt="Possible app logo (to be adapted)" /></a></p>

<p>The NFL can prohibit X from using its trademarks, or markings that would be <a href="http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/webaka/html/Likelihood/Likelihood_of_Confusion.html" rel="nofollow">likely to confuse</a> a reasonable person, in any of X's business marketing.  </p>

<p>The NFL's shield wordmark has USPTO registration number 4682232 (deep links aren't allowed, but their search engine is <a href="http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=login&amp;p_lang=english&amp;p_d=trmk" rel="nofollow">here</a>.) The images you've added don't seem alike enough to be confusing to me (I don't think I'd be mistaking one for the other), but in a lot of settings the app name will have only text, not an image.  Then you get at the trademark issue for the term "NFL" itself. </p>

<p>NFL can trademark that three-letter sequence, and there are good reasons for them being able to keep control of that trademark to authenticate sourcing.  For example, if I said "this hamburger is from McDonalds" you have certain expectations about it based on the brand, and McDonalds the company has a legally protected interest in preventing me from saying that if it wasn't true.  I have no right to put that 9-letter sequence on my burger joint without a license from the corporate giant.  </p>

<p>Similarly, The NFL has a legally protected interest in preventing somebody from advertising or implying that an information source or the information contained therein is licensed and/or an official source of information, if that's not true.  A reasonable person might expect that an information source about NFL player injuries, with "NFL" in its name, would be an official licensed source of that information; the real NFL can seek an injunction and/or penalties if that's not actually the case.  "Pro Football Player Injury Tracker" might not carry the same expectation. </p>

<p>At the bottom of <a href="http://www.nfl.com/" rel="nofollow">NFL.com</a>, they claim, emphasis added, that "<strong>NFL and</strong> the NFL shield design are registered trademarks of the National Football League." So they have put folks on notice they intend to defend that three-letter sequence as theirs, at least for all subjects related to professional American football. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.ehow.com/list_6647869_nfl-super-bowl-trademark-regulations.html" rel="nofollow">Sean Mullin says</a> "The NFL is notorious for guarding its intellectual property rights to the full extent of the law."  X should probably spend some time with an IP lawyer.  </p>

<p>If you're asking if it's <em>possible</em> for X to legally use the NFL's trademark, the short answer is <strong>yes</strong>.  It is possible for X to license use of the trademark from the NFL so long as the NFL is willing to grant/sell the license on terms that X also agrees to.</p>

<p>See <a href="https://www.nfl.info/NFLConsProd/Welcome/cpAgreement.htm" rel="nofollow">this prequalification page</a> linked to from <a href="http://www.legalteamusa.net/tacticalip/2013/10/25/the-nfl-and-trademarks/" rel="nofollow">this law firm's website</a>, or click "Become a Licensee" <a href="https://www.nfl.info/NFLConsProd/Welcome/index.html" rel="nofollow">here</a> to see that in context. </p>

<p>It seems to me that <strong>NFL</strong> Injury Tracker might fall under the same use as the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playboy_Enterprises,_Inc._v._Welles" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Playboy case</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Court held that nominative use (a type of fair use for discussing
the product itself) is permitted where:</p>
<p>The product or service can not be readily identified without using the
trademark (i.e. trademark is descriptive of a person, place, or
product attribute);</p>
<p>Only so much of the mark may be used as is reasonably necessary for
identification (e.g. the words may be reasonably used but not the
specific font or logo); and</p>
<p>The user does nothing to suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the
trademark holder - which applies even if the nominative use is
commercial.</p>
<p>Here, the Ninth Circuit Court applied the nominative fair use test to
the defendant and concluded the Defendant’s use of these trademarked
items was permissible because there was <strong>no other practical way for the
Defendant to describe herself</strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If someone is tracking injuries in the NFL, I hope a court would find that there is no other practical way to describe the data source than to refer to the NFL. I would think that they should <strong>not</strong> use the logo at all as this fails the &quot;only so much of the mark may be used&quot; test.</p>
<p>As for number three, confusion was addressed by another answer.</p>

trademark