Pepperdine University v. Netflix, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-01429-CV
(ADSx) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 31, 2026)

After denying
the motion for preliminary injunction, the court finally tosses Pepperdine’s
lawsuit based on use of a fictional Waves team in a Netflix show. Rogers
applies to content, even prominent content, in a TV show.

Pepperdine claimed, and the court assumed, its rights in “Waves”
for its athletic teams, along with a blue and orange color scheme “in
conjunction with athletic programs and athletic merchandise, and/or in
conjunction with other symbols that are associated with and identify the
university—including the ‘Waves’ team name and the number ‘37.’”

Defendants made and distributed Running Point, “a
series about a woman who is unexpectedly appointed president of a basketball
franchise named the Los Angeles Waves.” The LA Waves allegedly use a mark similar
to Pepperdine’s Waves trademark and similar colors to Pepperdine’s colors: a
similar font, the color orange for the lettering, white outlining, a blue
border, and the use of the word “Waves” in a similar context—on athletic-style
clothing.

Pepperdine alleged that the use of the Waves marks is “pervasive”
in the series, and appears throughout the series—on jerseys, shirts, stadiums,
etc., including a logo that is similar to Pepperdine’s Waves mark, with a blue
and white wave next to the orange “WAVES” text. “The show also includes a
framed jersey in a conference room with the number 37 on it.”

Pepperdine alleged that defendants (or others) promoted Running
Point with Waves references: Actors have posted pictures of themselves in
“Waves” jerseys, with the caption “SIGNED to the Los Angeles Waves! . . . Check
out my dunks on Running Point now on Netflix.” Another actor posted an image
which prominently states “Los Angeles WAVES.” Defendant Kaling International’s
official Instagram profile previously showed its founder, Mindy Kaling, wearing
a “WAVES” shirt, and included a biography reading “Home of the Los Angeles
WAVES.”

Pepperdine alleged that the team name is thus “essentially
synonymous with the show’s identity and its source.” Also, third parties are allegedly
now selling variations of Waves-branded merchandise under the description
“Running Point.”

The court looked to the cases discussed in JDI to identify
the appropriate situations to use the Rogers test: the “Barbie Girl”
case, University of Alabama Board of Trustees v. New Life Art, Inc., 683 F.3d
1266 (2012) and Louis Vuitton Malletier S. A. v. Warner Bros. Entertainment
Inc., 868 F. Supp. 2d 172 (S.D.N.Y. 2012). The court also pointed to the Rogers-based
dismissals in Haas Automation, Inc. v. Steiner, No. 24-CV-03682-AB-JC, 2024 WL
4440914 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 25, 2024) and JTH Tax LLC d/b/a Liberty Tax v. AMC
Networks Inc., 694 F. Supp. 3d 315 (S.D.N.Y. 2023). In the former, a book
included plaintiff’s mark on its front cover, back cover, and on several pages,
but the mark was “not used to tell the consumer who published the book or the
source of the book.” Rather, the mark told the consumer what the book was about
and who the author worked for. In the latter, the defendant’s TV series
included a fictional tax preparation business called “Sweet Liberty Tax
Services.” In both cases, defendants had not used the marks “as their own
identifying trademark.”

By contrast, post-JDI, courts have rejected Rogers
as applied to the name of a news website and the title of a film.

Netflix argued that its uses were not source-identifying and
that defendants were clearly identifying themselves as the source of the TV
series.

The court agreed. It was insufficient to allege “extensive
use of the Waves mark in the show, Defendants’ use of the Waves mark to market
the show, consumers’ connection of the Waves mark with the show, and
Defendants’ previous pattern of obtaining trademarks for fictional entities
within their television series.” That’s because the question is whether
defendants “used the Waves mark as a designation of source for their own
product—Running Point.”

Just as “Barbie Girl” repeated Barbie’s name and imitated
her voice, pervasive use of the Waves “mark” “does not explicitly mislead as to
the source of the work,” and does not “explicitly or otherwise, suggest that it
was produced by [Pepperdine].” That didn’t change with allegations that the use
in the content was so pervasive as to be “essentially synonymous with the
show’s identity.” Nor did the court accept conclusory allegations that the use was
source identifying.

At most, Pepperdine alleged that the Waves mark is
“immediately recognized” to identify the Running Point series, and that
its use is synonymous with the series. But use to “identify the show” is not
itself use “as a designation of source.” Identifying the show can include content!
An actor who posts themselves in a “Waves” jersey saying “Check out my dunks on
Running Point now on Netflix” is pretty clearly identifying Netflix as the
source of the show. Use in marketing wasn’t inherently trademark use, nor was
it relevant that “Defendants have obtained trademarks in fictional businesses
central to their shows in the past.”

The use was artistically relevant and not explicitly
misleading. The court noted that the parties did not, as alleged, use the Waves
marks for the same “purpose”; while you could call both “sports-related
entertainment,” Pepperdine uses the Waves mark to identify its collegiate
sports teams, and defendants use it in a TV series for a fictional sports team.

Although Pepperdine alleged that third parties sell Running
Point Waves merchandise, they didn’t explain how defendants could be liable
for the acts of these third parties.

Nor did statements like “home of the Los Angeles WAVES,” equate
to claims like “‘Nimmer on Copyright,’ ‘Jane Fonda’s Workout Book,’ or ‘an
authorized biography’” as a statement that misstates who authored or endorsed
the series. The question was whether defendants were misleading consumers as to
the source of the Running Point series. To the contrary, they were explicitly
claiming to be the source of the series, rather than claiming “brought to you
by Pepperdine,” or even “brought to you by the WAVES.” A fictional professional
sports team “can clearly be distinguished by consumers from the Pepperdine
Waves—a real collegiate sports team.”

from Blogger https://tushnet.blogspot.com/2026/04/netflixs-promotion-of-fictional-team.html