Spalding Corporation Initiates Lawsuit Against YouTube Star, MrBeast, over Copyright Infringement of 'The Beast' Trademark in Basketball Context
In a recent turn of events, the business enterprise of popular YouTube personality MrBeast (Jimmy Donaldson) has found itself embroiled in a legal battle with Spalding, the parent company of the renowned sports equipment brand. The lawsuit, filed on August 12, 2025, alleges trademark infringement and unfair competition, centring around the use of the mark "The Beast" on sports balls, specifically basketballs.
The dispute dates back to last year, when Russell Brands, the company behind Spalding, objected to MrBeast's use of a "virtually identical mark" on basketballs. Despite cease and desist letters and steps taken by MrBeast to discontinue sales, Russell Brands maintains that the actions remain infringing and create consumer confusion due to the similarity of the marks and overlapping product channels.
Russell Brands argues that MrBeast's use of marks such as "Beast," "The Beast," "MrBeast," and confusingly similar variations on basketballs, footballs, and other merchandise infringes on their established rights. The marks, according to Russell, are similar in sight, sound, and commercial impression, leading to potential marketplace confusion.
As of August 13, 2025, the MrBeast basketball is no longer available for sale. However, the lawsuit indicates that further legal contention continues. The dispute thus revolves around intellectual property rights involving pre-existing trademarks and whether MrBeast’s branding infringes on Spalding’s longstanding rights to "The Beast" mark in the sports equipment domain.
The lawsuit, Russell Brand, LLC v. Beast Holdings LLC et al, has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Greg N. Stivers. Russell seeks monetary damages, including profits, attorneys' fees, and other costs, and demands an injunction to stop MrBeast from selling products bearing the trademarks.
This ongoing litigation serves as a reminder of the challenges faced by influencers when launching branded merchandise that may conflict with existing trademarks. MrBeast may argue for fair use, claiming their use of the mark is sufficiently different. Registration of the mark gives Russell presumption of ownership, the opportunity to license the mark, exclusive right to use the mark, and anti-counterfeit protections from U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
[1] The Verge, "Spalding sues MrBeast over 'Beast' branded basketballs," August 13, 2025, https://www.theverge.com/2025/8/13/23015564/spalding-sues-mrbeast-beast-brand-basketballs-trademark
[2] TechCrunch, "Spalding sues MrBeast over 'Beast' basketballs," August 13, 2025, https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/13/spalding-sues-mrbeast-over-beast-basketballs/
[4] Variety, "Spalding Sues MrBeast Over ‘Beast’ Branded Basketballs," August 13, 2025, https://variety.com/2025/biz/news/spalding-sues-mrbeast-over-beast-branded-basketballs-1235096444/
- The legal dispute between MrBeast and Russell Brands (the parent company of Spalding) not only involves the analysis of trademark infringement in the finance sector, but also the sports domain, particularly in relation to basketballs.
- The ongoing lawsuit between MrBeast and Spalding signifies a significant analysis in the business world, highlighting the challenges influencers face when launching branded merchandise that might conflict with existing trademarks.
- The financial implications of this legal battle extend beyond monetary damages and attorneys' fees, as controlling the use of trademarks in sports equipment, such as basketballs and footballs, could potentially influence market share and brand reputation in both the sports and business industries.
