Maryland vs. "Terps": What a University's Cease-and-Desist Reveals About Cannabis Branding Risk

A university demanded a seven-year-old terpene company change its name, and the legal questions underneath are messier than the headline suggests.

By Cannible Editorial

The University of Maryland has demanded that Terps USA, a Colorado cannabis company, abandon its logo, rename itself, and surrender a federal trademark the USPTO approved in 2021. Founder Ken Fry said no. Nothing here is a court ruling, and no lawsuit has been filed, so the practical upshot for you as a cannabis operator is not to watch for a verdict. It is to clear your own brand name against the full commercial landscape, not just the cannabis one, before someone with a bigger legal budget sends you a letter of your own.

Here is what the dispute involves and why it matters to your brand.

This article is general information, not legal advice. Trademark disputes turn on facts specific to each mark and each market. If you have received a demand letter or are naming a brand, speak with a qualified trademark attorney.

CBS News Baltimore: UMD threatens legal action against cannabis product company over name — The news hook: the university's demand and the company's refusal.

What the university actually demanded

In July 2026, the University of Maryland sent Terps USA a cease-and-desist letter. That letter carries zero legal force on its own. It is a demand backed by the threat of a lawsuit. No court has ruled on anything.

The letter asks Terps USA to take three specific steps, according to reporting on the dispute:

UMD claims the cannabis company's branding dilutes its mark and creates consumer confusion. Both claims are assertions that have not been tested in a courtroom.

The timeline has a personal wrinkle too. A UMD alumnus emailed Terps USA in December 2025, accusing it of stealing the university's image. Seven months later, the formal cease-and-desist arrived, according to industry reporting.

Why "terps" means two different things to two audiences

One five-letter word, two completely different audiences, and meanings that share essentially nothing.

To Maryland fans, "Terps" is the nickname for the Maryland Terrapins, the university's athletic identity. To cannabis consumers, "terps" is shorthand for terpenes, the aromatic compounds that shape a cannabis product's smell, flavor, and character.

Terps USA sells terpene sprays for cannabis products. Its name describes exactly what it sells. That is the whole argument in one sentence.

The word has deep roots on the cannabis side. "Terps" is widely used industry terminology, and an entire ecosystem of cannabis brands has built product lines and social media presences around it, broadly enough that the term is arguably as associated with cannabis culture online as with any university. As the marketplace moves past its historical focus on potency, terpenes now play a significant role in how consumers make purchasing decisions.

One important caution: widespread industry use of a term does not automatically win a trademark dispute. Trademark law examines specific marks in specific commercial contexts. The fact that many companies use "terps" informs the analysis. It does not decide it.

That dual meaning is where this whole dispute lives, and where it will likely be decided.

A registration gap complicates the university's position

The university's earlier trademark registration claimed first use of "Terps" back in 1933. The U.S. Patent Office canceled it in March 2023 after a missed renewal filing. A separate "Maryland Terrapins" registration was canceled that November for the same reason. Same administrative mistake, twice.

The university operated without a standalone federal registration for "Terps" for close to three years, until January 2026. A newer application filed in June 2026 is still pending review.

Registration status shapes leverage in trademark disputes, and a lapsed registration weakens the paper trail an enforcer relies on. That is not a small thing to overlook when you are the one sending the letter.

Terps USA's attorney has also pointed out that the UMD registration cited in the cease-and-desist covers organizing college athletic competitions and broadcasting them. That is a commercial category with no connection to terpene products.

What Terps USA said in response

Terps USA's pushback, as stated by Fry and the company's attorney, comes down to three things:

None of these claims have been tested in court yet. The color shift is worth watching, because color is one of the elements trademark analysis weighs when comparing marks. A documented move away from Maryland's red weakens a visual-similarity argument, assuming the timeline holds up.

Seven years of operation, zero reported confusion, and a color change that predates the letter give the company a real basis to push back.

The three trademark questions that will decide this

Any negotiation or litigation that follows will turn on three specific legal questions. Understanding them helps you read whatever comes next.

Likelihood of confusion

Courts look at whether consumers encountering one mark would assume the other party made or endorsed the product. The analysis weighs mark similarity, commercial context, and buyer sophistication. A terpene spray sold to cannabis consumers sits in a very different market from college athletics. That distance matters.

Registered marks versus everyday language

A trademark registration grants rights tied to specific goods and services. UMD's rights in "Terps" for athletics say very little, on their own, about terpene shorthand in cannabis commerce.

Dilution

Dilution is UMD's strongest rhetorical claim and its hardest legal one. Under federal law, only famous marks qualify, meaning names the general American public recognizes nationwide, on the level of Nike or Coca-Cola. Regional or sports-fan recognition falls short of the federal standard. Whether "Terps" clears that bar among the general public, not just college sports fans, is a question only a court could answer.

Confusion, context, and dilution are all open questions. A letter resolves none of them.

What cannabis brands can learn right now

Trademark disputes in cannabis are becoming more common, and the pressure is coming from outside the industry as much as within it. Hershey's has sent cease-and-desist letters to cannabis companies. ITG Brands successfully pursued dilution claims against Capna over interlocking "OOs" in their respective logos. Strain names, logo similarities, and brand extensions have all been litigated.

What cannabis founders and brand teams can take from this:

What happens next, and what to watch

A cease-and-desist rarely ends in court. Four realistic paths exist from here:

Anyone following this should monitor USPTO records for UMD's pending application and watch for any court filing. Until a complaint appears on an actual docket, calling this a lawsuit is inaccurate. It is a demand, a refusal, and nothing more so far. Most trademark disputes at this stage resolve before litigation.

Frequently asked questions

Is UMD suing Terps USA?

No. UMD sent a cease-and-desist letter, which is a demand rather than a legal action. No lawsuit has been filed.

Can a university own the word "Terps"?

A university can own trademark rights in "Terps" for specific goods and services, such as athletic competitions. Trademark law grants no ownership of a word across every commercial context.

Does a federal trademark guarantee a company can keep using its name?

No. A registration is strong evidence of rights, and it can still be challenged, canceled, or limited through legal proceedings.

What is trademark dilution?

Dilution is harm to a famous mark's distinctiveness even without consumer confusion. Federal dilution claims are available only for marks the general American public recognizes nationwide.

Why does it matter that UMD's trademark lapsed?

A lapsed registration weakens the legal leverage behind enforcement. If UMD lacked an active federal registration for "Terps" when Terps USA built its brand, that affects which party can claim stronger rights and when.

What is a terpene, and why does it matter here?

Terpenes are aromatic compounds found in cannabis and other plants. They influence smell, flavor, and the overall character of a product. "Terps" is established shorthand for terpenes across cannabis retail, media, and brand naming, which is why Terps USA argues its name is descriptive, not a reference to any university.

What should a cannabis brand do if it receives a cease-and-desist?

Contact a trademark attorney immediately. Do not respond directly, do not ignore the letter, and do not make any public statements before getting legal advice. A cease-and-desist is the beginning of a process.

Could Terps USA lose its federal trademark even if it wins the dispute with UMD?

Yes. Federal trademark registrations can be challenged, canceled for non-use, or limited by a court regardless of who initiated the original dispute. Registration is not permanent protection.

Key takeaways

The Cannible Newsroom's take

If a friend running a terpene brand asked us about this, we would tell them the same thing we would tell any operator: the story is interesting, but the lesson arrives long before the ruling does. This dispute tests whether an institution's athletic nickname can override an industry's everyday vocabulary in a commercial category the institution never entered. The registration lapse, the terpene shorthand, and seven years of operating history all give Terps USA a credible basis to push back. The university has money and motivation. Neither side has a guaranteed win.

What concerns us is the asymmetry. A cease-and-desist letter is cheap to send and expensive to answer. Plenty of small cannabis brands rebrand simply because fighting is not worth the legal bill, and that outcome tells you nothing about who was right. It is worth being precise about what has and has not happened here, because the coverage will drift toward calling it a lawsuit.

The nuance is that "everyone in the industry uses this word" is a real argument and not a winning one by itself. Trademark analysis is context-specific. So clear your name against the full commercial landscape, not just the cannabis space. Document every branding decision with dates. Treat trademark maintenance as a recurring operating cost, because it is one.

We will update this article as the law, the filings, or the facts change.

Sources and further reading

For your own brand, check current USPTO records and speak with a licensed trademark attorney in your jurisdiction before acting on anything here.

Shopping for terpene-forward products

If this dispute got you thinking about terpenes rather than trademarks, start with the plant side. Our strain pillar page covers how terpene profiles shape aroma, flavor, and effect, and our dispensary directory helps you find retailers near you who publish terpene data on their menus. If you are not sure what to ask for at the counter, how to choose a dispensary walks through the questions worth asking about lab results and product labeling.

View on Cannible →