The NCAA sued DraftKings for trademark infringement over its use of “March Madness” and other registered trademarks, but the gaming giant claims fair usage.
In a complaint filed in federal court in Indiana on March 20, the college sports governing body noted that DraftKings has continued to use terminology including “March Madness”, “Sweet Sixteen”, “Elite Eight” and “Final Four” despite being asked not to. The NCAA is seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) to force DraftKings to remove those terms.
“DraftKings deliberately adopted and prominently began using the NCAA’s iconic NCAA Basketball Marks, including confusingly similar variations thereof, to trade on — and usurp — the immense goodwill, recognition, and consumer trust embodied in those Marks at the precise moment of peak public attention,” stated the court filing.
The NCAA claimed that DraftKings’ “unlawful” use in betting menus and promotional material serves to “deliberately exacerbate consumer confusion and reinforce a false association with or sponsorship by the NCAA.”
DraftKings claims fair usage
In a statement provided to SBC Americas, DraftKings responded to the lawsuit by stressing that it uses the terms “in plain text and as a fair use” in the same manner as other tournaments.
“DraftKings does not use the term March Madness as a trademark, but rather uses it in plain text and as a fair use in the same manner that other tournaments are displayed, such as the NIT, in order to accurately identify the different tournaments and their respective games,” said a spokesperson. “This is protected speech under the First Amendment and is not a violation of any brand’s trademark.
“We are confident that the courts will deny this request for an injunction.”
NCAA unhappy with implied affiliation
In a press release announcing the court filing, the NCAA said that unauthorized use of its trademarks is “flatly contrary” to the association’s institutional value that sports betting must not be associated with, endorsed by, or linked to NCAA championships or competing student-athletes.
“This causes confusion among NCAA members and student-athletes that the Association is involved with and/or endorsing sports betting, which is in direct contradiction to its robust education, integrity monitoring, anti-harassment and advocacy efforts to end risky prop bets,” it added.
The NCAA took the position that every day that DraftKings continues to use these marks, millions of sports fans including college-aged people are exposed to “the false suggestion” that the NCAA has authorized or endorsed DraftKings or gambling writ large, and also claims that the NCAA itself suffers “irreparable injury to its trademark rights, its brand and the integrity of its mission” for each day that passes.
“The NCAA does not have any commercial relationships with any sportsbooks of any kind and continues to uphold a strict prohibition on advertising and sponsorships associated with betting,” added the association. The NCAA also noted its ongoing lobbying efforts to limit prop bets and micro-betting on NCAA games, which it called “highly damaging.”
Other sportsbooks complied with NCAA request
In recent days, numerous other sportsbooks changed the language used on their platforms to stop using “March Madness” or any of the other listed terms. For example, as of Monday, FanDuel uses terms like “NCAA Basketball Mens Games”, BetMGM displays “Men’s March Matchups” and theScore Bet uses “NCAAB Championship 2026.”
SBC Americas understands the NCAA sent notices to other sportsbooks and/or prediction market platforms asking them to stop using the trademarks, and those other operators complied.
The NCAA did not confirm what it considers to be the parameters of what constitutes “confusingly similar variations” of terms including “March Madness”, “Sweet Sixteen”, “Elite Eight” and “Final Four”.
NCAA vocal on prediction markets
The NCAA’s lawsuit against DraftKings comes amid continued scrutiny over the interaction between betting and college sports. NCAA President Charlie Baker and numerous state legislators across the U.S. have expressed concern about the negative effects of player prop betting on student-athletes, while the NCAA continues to deal with its own betting scandals.
Meanwhile, some of the language in the NCAA’s court complaint about DraftKings implying an association with the NCAA echoes public comments the body made about leading sports-focused prediction market platform Kalshi. Last November, the NCAA wrote to the company to ask it to stop implying a close relationship with the college sports governing body, noting that it was concerned about suffering reputational harm as a result.
Kalshi has since not only stopped using NCAA trademarks, deferring to more generic language but also includes a note on its basketball markets to specify that while it uses information “originating from the NCAA,” it is not in any way affiliated with or endorsed by the college sports governing body.
Meanwhile, in a letter to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in January, Baker stated his desire for prediction market platforms to be mandated to work with the NCAA on their college sports contracts, including on determining which markets are allowed.
Major pro leagues have struck deals with prediction market companies in recent months, including the NHL and MLB. In both of those cases, the leagues’ respective commissioners cited the opportunity to have more control over event contracts on their leagues as a motivation for brokering the partnerships.
