T
WASHINGTON — Arena Football One is facing trademark challenges from major brands including Formula 1, Nike and Abercrombie & Fitch, which claim the league’s “Arena Football One” and “AF1” wording could cause consumer confusion, according to recent filings with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
On Oct. 3, Formula 1, which is a popular international auto racing league, filed a “Notice of Opposition” before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board against Arena Football One.
F1’s grounds for appeal against AF1 include, “likelihood of confusion,” and “likelihood of dilution.”
“The [AF1] Services are entertainment services related to sports, which are highly related to the entertainment services offered by the Formula 1 Companies under the F1 Marks and covered by the F1 Registrations… The Applicant’s Mark encompasses in its entirety the Opposer’s F1 word mark and the ‘F1’ element is identical in sight, sound and commercial impression, and is highly similar to the F1 Marks overall. Both marks are pronounced similarly: ‘A-F-One” and ‘F-One.’ They share the dominant, final sound element “F-One.” The initial “A” in “AF1” is likely to be perceived as a minor variation or prefix, making the marks phonetically very close.” Attorneys for F1 stated in the appeal.
Attorneys for F1 noted that the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) adopted the “Formula 1 and F1” marks in 1950 to identify its new championship series.
“Since 1996, the exclusive rights to commercially exploit the Championship, including the right to use the F1 Marks, have been granted by the FIA to the Formula 1 Companies.” the appeal stated
AF1 submitted its registration application on Sept. 1, 2024 – months before its inaugural season kicked off on March 7 2025.
The USPTO reviewed and approved the league’s application in its official Gazette on April 8. But the filing soon drew opposition from Formula 1, followed by Nike Inc. and Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Co., which both submitted extensions to oppose but have not yet filed formal complaints.
“Pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1063(a), the Opponent will be damaged by the registration of the Applicant’s Mark in that members of the purchasing public are likely to be confused or mistaken that the Applicant’s Services offered under the Applicant’s Mark originate from the Opposer or the Formula 1 Companies, or are otherwise connected to the Championship, including that they are sponsored by, endorsed by, or affiliated with the source of goods and services offered under the F1 Marks and the marks shown in the F1 Registrations. Such likelihood of confusion results in damage to the goodwill among purchasers and the trade that the F1 Marks symbolize.” F1’s attorneys argued.
On August 5, the USPTO granted AF1’s amendment request due to “oppositions threatened by third parties.” The league’s lawyer William L. Niro, a notable attorney who represented the now-defunct Arena Football League, revised the application’s classifications and labeled it under Class 041: “Organizing and presenting football games before live audiences and on television, radio and other forms of media including the global computer network.”
Arena Football One has a deadline of Dec. 2 to respond to the opposition appeal or will face a default judgement in favor of F1. If the league files a response in time, the trial will begin on January 1, 2026 and could continue through 2027.
Arena Insider reached out to the attorneys representing F1, Nike, and Abercrombie & Fitch but have yet to hear back.
On Oct. 15, a suspension letter was issued on the AF1’s application pending further review.
This remains a developing story and more details will be released as it becomes available.
