Jerry Jones, Dallas Cowboys: The business of branding

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Jerry Jones, Dallas Cowboys: The business of branding

When Jerry Jones bought the Dallas Cowboys NFL franchise in 1989, the first thing he did was identify what he could monetize. “It was the brand,” he said yesterday in a keynote address at the INTA Annual Meeting. “You take the passion, tradition, entertainment value and visibility and go to town with the brand.”

At the time, he said, “Dallas was down”: buildings were empty and times were hard. But Jones had made money—lots of money—in oil and gas and had a lifelong love of football. It was while on a fishing trip in Mexico, suffering from “a tequila-induced hangover” that he picked up the phone and offered to buy the franchise.

Thus began a process that would lead to three Super Bowl victories, a colossal marketing program, the building of the most impressive (and expensive) sports stadium and the creation of the second most valuable sports brand in the world (behind Manchester United of the English Premier League).

Yesterday Jones recounted some of the battles on the way, in an interview with sports broadcaster Brian Estridge. He said he realized early on the potential of the Cowboys to exploit their brand and sell sponsorship, but this brought him into direct conflict with the NFL over who had the rights to market trademarks and logos. The NFL sued him for US$300 million. He counter sued for $700 million (“I thought the publicity alone would be worth the fight”). The result was a settlement that said every NFL team gets to use its own brands, but the NFL controls the Super Bowl logo and the cumulative brand.

That led to a boom in sponsorship, memorabilia sales and TV earnings for the Cowboys in the past 20 years. “We use all this visibility, interest and passion and bottle it up,” said Jones, who also stressed the role that trademark law has played in securing protection for the franchise’s name and logos, as well as its nickname—America’s Team.

The future will see technological change, and perhaps the acquisition of a brand that would go on the stadium, said Jones: “If a name’s going to go on the stadium, you should own that company.” But he insisted that whatever changes come, one thing will stay the same: “We’re going to be in the branding business.”

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

In-house counsel explain why firms should provide risk management advice that helps them achieve their goals
Attorneys at four firms explain the AI trends they expect in the future, including a potential shift in who plaintiffs sue for copyright infringement
The dispute at the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court pits Dryrobe against D-Robe and will include a ‘genericide’ element
Novo Nordisk losing patent rights covering Ozempic in Canada and a US Supreme Court decision favouring Ed Sheeran were also among the top talking points
The court will hand down its ruling in Iconix v Dream Pairs on Tuesday, June 24, in a case that concerns post-sale confusion
Developments included a stay in a row concerning the UPC’s jurisdiction and a timeline for the rollout of the long-awaited new CMS
Jorg Thomaier, who has been head of IP at the German pharma company since 2010, will leave later this year and hand the reins to the company’s head of patents
Companies must conduct thorough IP due diligence – even if it may not be mandatory
Celia Cheah at Wong & Partners in Malaysia says she is aiming to tap into the Baker McKenzie member firm’s international network and expand its IP portfolio
A team of partners that joined Boies Schiller Flexner say they would like to double the firm’s patent litigation capabilities
Gift this article