Page 6 - Kattison Avenue Newsletter - Spring 2026 - Issue 16

• Qualified sustainability claims provide stronger defenses against greenwashing challenges: Recent litigation highlights the distinction
courts are increasingly drawing between narrowly framed certification claims and broader environmental benefit messaging. For
example, an Illinois federal court found that “certified sustainable” claims were literally true where the products had in fact received
the referenced certification, even though plaintiffs challenged the environmental practices underlying the certification process. At the
same time, however, the court allowed broader “good for the environment” claims to proceed, finding that consumers could interpret
those statements as independent representations about the products’ environmental impact rather than mere puffery. The decision
highlights the comparatively lower risk associated with narrowly framed certification claims and the heightened scrutiny applied to
broader unqualified environmental benefit messaging.
• Enforcement decisions should account for reputational and amplification risks: Speakers emphasized that brands should carefully
evaluate whether pursuing litigation or aggressive enforcement efforts will meaningfully protect the business or instead amplify
criticism and create negative public perception. Factors such as the audience size, social media reach and visibility of the opposing
party may influence whether enforcement efforts are strategically worthwhile or risk portraying the company as a “bully.”

Legal Trends in Sports Marketing:
Sponsorships and Endorsements

Sports sponsorships and athlete endorsements continue to
represent a significant marketing channel for advertisers seeking
to leverage emotional fan connections and achieve targeted
demographic reach. However, these arrangements carry distinct
legal complexities that counsel must navigate carefully.

• Collegiate name, image and likeness (NIL) deals present
unique compliance and control risks: Unlike traditional
professional athlete endorsement arrangements, collegiate
NIL deals often involve overlapping authority among
universities, NIL collectives and the athletes themselves.
Universities may control institutional marks and negotiate
zimmytws/Shutterstock.com
NIL agreements directly with athletes, while collectives
aggregate player rights and athletes retain the ability to
enter into independent arrangements. State laws and school
policies may further restrict certain product categories,
prohibit use of school intellectual property such as logos
and colors, bar on-campus filming or require disclosure of
agreements to the institution. Speakers also highlighted
increased scrutiny through the National Collegiate Athletic
Association’s (NCAA) NILGo portal, which evaluates
whether compensation reflects fair market value rather than
impermissible “pay for play” arrangements, and has rejected
deals involving collectives lacking legitimate commercial
operations or attempts to “warehouse” athlete NIL rights for Jinitzail Hernandez/Shutterstock.com
undefined future use.

• Force majeure provisions remain important negotiation points after COVID-era disruptions: The pandemic fundamentally reshaped
how sponsors and teams approach nonperformance risk, particularly where games proceeded without fans or sponsorship inventory
became partially unavailable. Speakers noted that modern force majeure clauses now commonly address whether sponsorship
payments continue during disruptions, when termination rights arise, and how substitute benefits or refunds should be calculated
where contracted entitlements cannot be delivered. Related provisions governing make-good rights, valuation methodologies and
dispute resolution mechanisms have become increasingly important as parties attempt to allocate economic risk more predictably.

6 Kattison Avenue | Spring 2026