Puma Sues Tiger Woods’s Sun Day Red Over Logo

Sun Day Red, Tiger Woods’s new apparel line through TaylorMade, is facing its second trademark dispute in four months—this one coming from Puma.

In a court filing last week, the German apparel company alleged the Sun Day Red logo is too similar to the primary “Leaping Cat” logo Puma has used since 1969. The filing was submitted through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in Virginia, with a goal of preventing Sun Day Red from using its logo, which is a tiger with 15 lines to honor Woods’s 15 major championships. The name Sun Day Red is a nod to Woods wearing red on Sundays in golf tournaments. 

“Due to the confusing similarity of the marks and the identical, legally identical and or closely related nature of the goods and services of the parties, consumer confusion is likely between the Challenged Marks and the Leaping Cat logo,” Puma said in its filing. 

Sun Day Red launched in February, which followed an end to Woods’s 27-year deal with Nike. Woods’s tiger logo is a departure from the TW insignia he used with Nike. The company’s products are currently available only on the Sun Day Red website, but it plans to enter the wholesale market this year while adding junior gear to its men’s and women’s lines. 

Puma isn’t the first company to claim Sun Day Red is encroaching on its trademark territory. In September, Tigeraire, a Louisiana company that makes cooling products for athletes, filed a similar notice to Puma’s, accusing Sun Day Red of “unlawfully hijacking” its logo.  

Tigeraire started in 2020 and originally partnered with LSU’s football program to make a helmet that implements its cooling technology. Over time, the company developed other cooling products for athletes, such as wearables for golfers, and made fans that could attach to the bill of a cap to keep players cool through 18 holes. This likely adds to its concern that consumers may confuse Sun Day Red’s logo with its own. 

That case was originally filed in Louisiana District Court, and it is currently in litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. 

“The trademark office is pretty favorable to strong trademarks, so in some ways Puma may be in a better position because it does have a well-recognized mark,” Rebecca Tushnet, a Harvard Law School professor who specializes in trademark law, tells Front Office Sports. “While a puma is not a tiger, they’re both big cats and they’re both leaping in similar positions. The PTO [patent trademark office] may say, ‘Yeah, they look pretty similar.’ Tigeraire’s looks more similar, but at the same time, it’s definitely not as well known and that often is more important to the trademark office.”

Tushnet said the result of one case won’t impact the other. 

A spokesperson for TaylorMade, the company that makes Sun Day Red’s line, did not immediately reply to a request for comment. 

LA Golf vs. LA Golf

Separately, TGL, Woods’s new virtual league created by him and Rory McIlroy, filed a lawsuit Monday in Delaware court against golf equipment maker LA Golf Partners LLC, alleging the league is allowed to use “LA Golf Club” in its branding after doing so for the past year. On Tuesday, the league premiered its debut season on ESPN. TGL is asking the court to declare that the use of “LA Golf Club” does not infringe on any trademark or constitute unfair competition.

TGL has a team based in Los Angeles called Los Angeles Golf Club, which was originally announced in June 2023. The league has used the name (and the LAGC acronym) in promotional materials such as apparel and drinking glasses, and it says the equipment company didn’t bring any disputes for more than a year until recently. According to the lawsuit, LAGC is demanding “that TGL cease use” of its “LA Golf Club” trademarks, which the company says are “confusingly similar” to its own.

The specific marks registered to LA Golf Partners LLC (LAGP) have the letters “LAGC” inside a circle. The lawsuit notes the LA Golf Club trademark application wasn’t filed until mid-June 2023, after TGL’s Los Angeles team was already announced. TGL said there is no likelihood the marks would be confused and the only similarity they have is the use of LA, which is widely known as an abbreviation for the city and therefore does not constitute infringement. 

“A review of LAGP’s other products, its website, and its advertising, the trademarks that LAGP actually uses with its golf equipment are ‘LA Golf’ and ‘LAGP,’” the complaint said. “Nowhere does LAGP actually use the mark ‘LA Golf Club.’”

The lawsuit said the USPTO has previously denied the registration of one of the golf equipment company’s marks on the basis that “LA” is descriptive.

“It is very hard to get protectable rights in a place/state,” Tushnet says. “It is unlikely that [LAGP is] going to do all that well in claiming they have protectable rights in that.”  

TGL did not immediately respond to a request for comment.