- South Africa plans special legal protection for the 2026 Rugby’s Greatest Rivalry Tour
- Common rugby terms like ‘Bok’, ‘Bokke’ and ‘Bok Friday’ could face restrictions in commercial use
- The proposed ban targets commercial marketing, not ordinary fan support
- Businesses could face criminal penalties for unauthorised commercial use
- Advertisers should review rugby-themed campaigns and submit comments before the consultation closes
As temperatures drop around the country, rugby is hotting up. South African rugby fans have plenty to look forward to in 2026, including the Rugby’s Greatest Rivalry Tour which will take place from 7 August 2026 to 12 September 2026.
The tour will see South Africa hosting the All Blacks as they travel the country playing the DHL Stormers, Hollywoodbets Sharks, Vodacom Bulls and Lions, as well as their ultimate rivals, the Springboks.
South Africans are accustomed to hearing calls to wear green and gold on “Bok Friday” during these types of tournaments. Yet a recently published government notice proposing restrictions on the unauthorised use of that term, as well as ‘Bok’, ‘Bokke’, ‘Bokkie’ and various other rugby-related words and images, could put a damper on that.
As part of broader efforts to protect the Rugby’s Greatest Rivalry Tour, the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition has published a notice of the Minister’s intention to declare the tour a “protected event” under section 15A of the Merchandise Marks Act.
It is simultaneously proposing that a wide range of words, slogans, emblems and images associated both with the event and individual teams be declared prohibited marks under section 15(1) of that Act. This would have been at the request of the organisers of the event, the South African Rugby Union (SARU).
What does ‘protected event’ status mean?
The proposed protected event designation would apply for the duration of the tour and would confer on it the special anti-ambush marketing protections available under the Merchandise Marks Act.
The legislation is designed to safeguard the substantial investments made by event organisers and sponsors. Businesses may not seek to derive promotional benefit from the event without authorisation.
Ordinary trade mark and passing-off principles usually focus on whether a business creates the impression of an association with, or sponsorship of, an event.
Protected event status goes further: it prevents traders from taking commercial advantage of the publicity surrounding the event, even if they stop short of claiming or implying any official connection.
This status has previously been afforded to events hosted in South Africa such as the FIFA World Cup South Africa 2010, the British & Irish Lions tours and the Netball World Cup 2023, and provide welcome protections. Without them, the commercial value of sponsorships and, ultimately, the events themselves, could be undermined.
Prohibited marks
The proposed protected event designation is unlikely to generate significant controversy. The proposed prohibited marks, however, may raise some eyebrows, simply because the net appears to have been cast widely, and the notice itself is unclear about where the boundaries lie.
The Minister is proposing a prohibition on the unauthorised use of a substantial list of words, slogans, emblems and images associated with the tour and South African rugby in general.
The list contains a number of unsurprising entries, including RUGBY’S GREATEST RIVALRY, RGR, THE GREATEST RIVALRY, A TOUR LIKE NO OTHER, SPRINGBOKS and SPRINGBOK WOMEN.
It also includes various Springbok emblems and jerseys, as well as names and logos associated with several rugby teams and organisations, including the All Blacks, Black Ferns, Sharks, Bulls, Lions, South African Rugby Union and New Zealand Rugby.
Sporting culture
However, the list does not stop there, and the proposed protection also extends to a number of terms that have become deeply embedded in everyday South African language and sporting culture. These include BOKS, BOK, BOKKIE and BOK FRIDAY, as well as SA RUGBY and SOUTH AFRICA RUGBY.
While some of these names and terms have already been protected as registered trade marks by SARU, such as SPRINGBOK and THE BOKKE, that type of protection is more limited. Trade mark registrations afford rights in relation to the specific goods and services for which they are registered, and similar goods and services.
In addition, in order to infringe a trade mark registration, the use must be as a trade mark, in the course of trade and, generally, in a manner likely to cause confusion.
There are also exceptions, such as where a registered trade mark is used in a bona fide descriptive manner. A trade mark registration is not a blanket prohibition on the use of the mark.
Why does this matter in practice?
A prohibition under section 15(1) of the Merchandise Marks Act, on the other hand, is far more powerful. It prohibits the use of the specified mark without authorisation from the rights holder outright and it is a criminal offence to contravene the prohibition.
This latest notice stands out because it does not contain any express limiting language. Many previous notices issued under section 15 have made it clear that the prohibition is directed at use that could cause confusion with, or take unfair advantage of, a particular trade, business or event.
This notice does not place any conditions on the use and may be read as contemplating a broader prohibition.
That matters because the proposed list includes words and phrases that are not confined to formal advertising campaigns. Just by way of example, ‘Go Bokke!’ is a resounding cry heard across the country when our team plays and ‘Bokkie’ is an affectionate term of endearment that appears in many contexts in South Africa.
Where to draw the line?
The same concern applies to ‘Bok Friday’. Schools, organisations, charities and individual fans have long celebrated Bok Friday by wearing official merchandise, or simply green and gold, to show support for the national team.
The tradition does not even appear to have originated with SARU, although SARU has enthusiastically supported it.
This raises a fair question: where should the line be drawn between legitimate protection of the commercial value of the tour and ordinary public expressions of support for South African rugby?
Section 15 of the Merchandise Marks Act itself empowers the Minister to prohibit the use of a mark only “in connection with any trade, business, profession, occupation or event, or in connection with a trade mark, mark or trade description applied to goods”.
There is a good argument that these statutory limits remain relevant, even if they have not been repeated in the notice. In other words, the notice is unlikely to be interpreted as prohibiting every conceivable use of the listed words or images.
The practical question is how the prohibition will be interpreted and enforced. Much will depend on whether SARU adopts a measured approach, distinguishing between genuine commercial exploitation of the tour and ordinary expressions of public support for South African rugby, or whether it decides to be heavy-handed.
What next?
The heading of the Minister’s notice states that it is an invitation for public comment on both the protected event status and the prohibited marks, but later in the notice it merely states that interested persons have 15 calendar days from the date of publication of the notice to submit written comments on the protected event status.
This appears to be an omission in the notice, and it is likely that the Minister intended to invite comment on both aspects.
The notice was published on 2 July 2026, meaning that affected stakeholders should move quickly if they wish to make representations.
What should advertisers and brand owners do now?
- Review any planned rugby-themed marketing campaigns and steer clear of either direct or indirect references to the Rugby’s Greatest Rivalry Tour, the Springboks and associated branding.
- Consider whether there are grounds to submit comments on the notice during the consultation process.
- Monitor the progress of the notice and any subsequent notices and assess marketing campaigns against the scope of the final prohibitions.
- Seek advice before launching campaigns intended to benefit from publicity surrounding the tour, since even indirect references to the event may breach the provisions of the Merchandise Marks Act.
South Africans are famously passionate about rugby, and there is no prohibition on enthusiasm. But as the green-and-gold excitement rises, it pays to ensure that marketing teams do not find themselves tackled by the law before reaching the try line.
Kelly Thompson is a partner at Adams & Adams.
