The ags are lucky to get anything for their trademark. Personally, I don't think it's valid because of the false information they based their trademark application on.
I wrote a piece on their "12th Man" tradition last year that documents how their "tradition" is a fairy tale. The term "12th Man" wasn't originated by the ags, they didn't have any "12th Man" tradition until they concocted their story about being done to only one substitute (when they knew they thee certainly were a number of players standing next to E. King Gill and available to play) as a radio play in 1939. If you haven't read the story I wrote, it's worth a read.
http://www.hornsports.com/texas-12th-man-story-21st-man/
The ags know their trademark filings contain material misleading statements that were attested to under penalty of perjury. Had Seattle challenged the validity of their trademark, the courts could have easily invalidated it. What I don't understand is how the ag leadership, all employees of the state of Texas, have not been told by the state attorney general to refile their trademark application with accurate information and to cease and desist from demanding payment from a trademark that was obtained under questionable pretenses.
