Cambridge Rowing Limited, founded by Omar Terywall in 2021, is now struggling against a significant hurdle. The University of Cambridge has recently entered formal opposition to all of its trademark applications. Terywall’s small business is based out of the City of Cambridge Rowing Club. It focuses on bringing beginners to the sport of rowing, having reached more than 5,000 participants since its inception. The case focuses on the University’s federal trademark registration for the term “Cambridge.” This trademark protects educational services through both sporting and cultural activities as well as sport camp services.
In the subpoena response, Terywall accuses the University’s objection as being bullying. His business recently applied to trademark its logo in class 25 for athletic apparel. Further, they filed in class 35 for merchandising and class 41 for corporate hospitality, sports events and training services. The University’s concern, understandably, comes from its prerogative to protect its trademarks from infringement.
The formal company name is Cambridge Rowing Limited but it is a Cambridge rowing experience – short and straightforward. And it’s just increasingly the reality of where we are and what we do,” Terywall said. He is clear to point out that “Cambridge” and “rowing” are words that should be owned by the community, not any one person or organization.
In the short time since its launch, Cambridge Rowing has become a major force in the local sporting culture. It offers corporate hospitality and training, as well as introductory rowing programs. The move by the University of Cambridge to formally object to Terywall’s trademark applications has put a cloud over the company’s operations.
According to the University of Cambridge spokesperson, “While we recognize this is not the intention in every case, we have to protect trademarks to prevent misuse. If there is no protection, fraudulent use would increase.” The spokesperson wanted to highlight the University’s commitment to working together. They would be excited to partner with anyone looking to use their trademark in good faith.
Liz Ward, an intellectual property expert, commented on the situation, saying, “The university is probably trying to protect its reputation when it comes to sport, and rowing is a sport.” Additionally, she pointed out that the objection had no chance of success in class 41, thereby highlighting the University’s likely weaknesses in their case.
Terywall expressed his frustration with the situation, stating, “To take ownership of the word ‘Cambridge’ and the word ‘rowing’ – it’s bonkers.” He further asserted that, “Nobody really owns the right to the word ‘Cambridge’ and nobody can say that they own the word ‘rowing’ either as well – it belongs to all of us.”
The new logo features the phrase “Cambridge Rowing Experience.” Further down, a basic drawing shows one sculler in a shell, furiously rowing on his oars. In responding to the complaint, Terywall contends that this type of imagery and branding does not violate the University’s established trademarks.
“When you’ve got a very big organization like them coming after you, it is pretty scary,” Terywall admitted. Terywall is aware of the responsibility that comes with the pressure from hallowed University of Cambridge. This nagging worry has him fearful about the future of his business.