Need to know
Ambush marketing — i.e., associating one’s brand with a high-profile event without being a formal sponsor — carries significant trademark infringement risks. However, brands can still capitalize on the advertising opportunities surrounding big sporting events while minimizing the risk of legal liability by choosing their words carefully, minding third-party intellectual property, and involving legal counsel early and often.
The FIFA World Cup 2026 is well underway. New York Knicks fans are still celebrating an NBA Finals run made for the history books. Before long, we’ll be counting down to another Super Bowl Sunday in February 2027 and then the LA 2028 Summer Olympics. For brands that are not official sponsors of these events, the temptation to attract consumer attention are them is enormous. But so is the legal risk.
Welcome to the world of ambush marketing, where brands associate themselves with high-visibility events despite not being an official sponsor. Rights holders like the NFL, the NHL, FIFA, and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) have understandably dim views of ambush marketing techniques. And these entities police their marquee events aggressively.
Here, we explore the legal and business risks of ambush marketing and provide practical considerations for brands who hope to ride the marketing high of a major sporting event while protecting their own intellectual property and staying out of the legal penalty box.
The legal terrain
The United States has no single federal "ambush marketing statute," but rights holders have a deep enforcement toolkit. Direct use of trademarks like FIFA WORLD CUP (Registration No. 2,645,052), SUPER BOWL (Registration No. 882,283), STANLEY CUP (Registration No. 2,422,903), or team logos can support claims for trademark infringement under the Lanham Act, alongside state-law unfair competition theories. The Olympics enjoy something extra: The Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act gives the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee exclusive rights to “Olympic,” ”Olympiad,” and the five-ring symbol — protection beyond standard trademark law. Even indirect campaigns that merely imply an official association—without using an organizer’s registered trademark—can trigger claims under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, as well as state consumer-protection statutes.
These types of indirect campaigns are often highly controversial. For example, at the 2010 World Cup, 36 fans in bright orange dresses, the signature color of Dutch brewer Bavaria, were ejected from the Netherlands–Denmark match for implying that Bavaria, a rival of official sponsor Budweiser, was affiliated with the tournament even though no Bavaria logo was visible. Another notable example is the 1996 Atlanta Olympics where — despite Reebok’s official sponsorship — it was Nike's well-documented marketing activations that made headlines.
But ambush marketing — either by directly using protected marks or indirectly implying sponsorship or association — comes with serious legal and business risks. Offending brands may face consequences ranging from social media or e-commerce takedowns, litigation, monetary damages, and/or injunctive relief. The monetary consequences of infringement may include lost profits commensurate with pricey official sponsorship contracts, disgorgement of the brand’s windfall, and, in exceptional cases, attorneys’ fees, totaling significantly more than what the official sponsor would pay. Injunctive relief may temporarily or permanently stop sales at a local or national level. And lost sales volume aside, a court order to stop sales and distribution can tarnish a brand and harm its business relationships with distributors or retailers.
The likelihood of these consequences varies significantly based on the specific marks at issue, but rights holders like the NFL and FIFA have a documented history of trademark enforcement. For example, to protect its “RAIDER NATION” trademark, the NFL and the Oakland Raiders sued to stop a Bay Area burger chain from using the phrase “RAID A NATION’S” on its billboard advertisements outside the team’s stadium. FIFA brought a challenge against a South African tavern for adding “World Cup 2010” to its sign. The U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee sued Puma for using PUMA TOKYO 2021, PUMA BEIJING 2022, and PUMA PARIS 2024. The NFL has even encouraged Super Bowl host cities to enact “clean-zone ordinances” that prohibit any outside signage or advertising and aim to maintain exclusivity for the NFL and its official sponsors. While the United States has no single “ambush marketing” statute, brands who choose to market around major sporting events should proceed with caution because rights holders possess a deep legal toolkit and have demonstrated willingness to use it.
Practical suggestions for non-sponsor brands
Still, brands need not avoid these major cultural events and advertising opportunities entirely. Some rights holders, like FIFA, provide intellectual property guidelines for how fans may celebrate their teams — and how brands may engage with major sporting events — without creating an unauthorized association.1
When crafting an advertising campaign around the next “big game,” brands should consider the following:
- Talk about the sport, not the event. Hockey, soccer, football, and the rituals of fandom are not exclusive to trademark holders like "FIFA World Cup," "Super Bowl Sunday," and "Road to the Stanley Cup" are. The cliché of brands referencing "the big game" exists precisely because it is often a lawful workaround.
- Use your words and hashtags carefully. Words like "official," "presents," and "sponsor" are red flags. So is layering official event hashtags into paid posts. Even host city names should be used with care. For example, the Olympics and FIFA often register the name of host cities plus the year as federal trademarks (e.g., PARIS 2024, LA 28, etc.). And these requirements do not exist only for official creative content. Influencer agreements should expressly prohibit affiliation claims and require disclosure language in all public posts.
- Mind the look and feel, not just the words. Trade dress and visual association can support an infringement or false-affiliation claim even when no protected mark appears in an ad. Color palettes paired with national flags; silhouettes that evoke an official trophy, mascot, or ring symbol; stylized host-year graphics like "26;" and imagery suggesting recognizable stadiums or host-city skylines can all imply the affiliation rights holders pursue. The Bavaria orange-dress incident is the canonical reminder that visual cues alone — even without a visible logo — can be enough to trigger litigation.
- Mind the venues and their footprints. Stadium ticket terms typically prohibit promotional use, and host cities are expected to enforce "clean zones" around World Cup sites. The IOC has long secured similar protections around Olympic venues. On-site stunts invite ejection, not earned media.
- Leverage individual athletes (but carefully). Partnerships with players through their personal endorsement rights are generally permissible, provided that the deal does not tie the athlete to a team, league, or tournament that has not authorized the use. This is especially true when a brand has a preexisting relationship with that athlete. Ads in which famous athletes are dressed in non-descript uniforms—like Josh Allen in a non-Buffalo Bills uniform—are attempting to walk this line.
- Don’t bench the legal team. Ambush marketing cases are often highly fact-dependent, and the risk to the business can change as a marketing campaign runs. Consulting a legal team experienced with Lanham Act disputes early and often can help to minimize legal risk and maximize marketing opportunities.
Takeaways
Major sporting events present real business opportunities and real legal risks. But the line between lawful advertising and ambush marketing is rarely bright; ambush marketing exists on a spectrum. Use of protected marks like SUPER BOWL or FIFA WORLD CUP carries the clearest legal exposure, but even indirect campaigns — e.g., those that lean on team colors, stadium imagery, or near-miss language — can draw the same enforcement response. Rights holders have shown they will pursue both. For non-sponsor brands, a big game marketing strategy requires careful planning: Choose words carefully, mind the entire look and feel of every advertisement, and draft a strong legal team early. The opportunity is real. So is the risk of getting it wrong.
