Will the Chicago Cubs Win Their Game Over 'The Rooftop Phenomenon'?

A federal court ruling on May 1 allowed the Chicago Cubs to continue their lawsuit against a rooftop bar, Wrigley View Rooftop, which offers paid views of games at Wrigley Field and uses the team’s trademarks. The dispute involves allegations that the bar is profiting from Cubs games and intellectual property without authorization.

The case stems from an ongoing disagreement over property and trademark rights, including a prior licensing arrangement that had permitted the rooftop business to use certain team rights. The Cubs have since filed a motion for summary judgment seeking to protect those rights, while the rooftop owner is expected to respond with a competing motion.

The litigation raises broader legal questions about the extent of sports teams’ rights in live events and the use of team trademarks by neighboring businesses. Finnegan partner Mark Sommers shared his insights into the case in a Q&A with Westlaw Today. Finnegan associate LaQuan Bates contributed to the responses.

Westlaw Today: First of all, what relationship have Dunican and Wrigley View had with the Chicago Cubs over the years? And when did this relationship go sour?

Mark: You cannot analyze this dispute without appreciating how unusual Wrigley Field is and how intertwined it is with the Wrigleyville neighborhood. This is not a situation where someone just happened to have a nice view of a ballpark. Wrigley is not a modern, self-contained stadium. It opened in 1914 and sits directly in the middle of a residential grid, which has always created a different kind of fan experience.

People do not just go to a game. They go to Wrigleyville, and over time, the surrounding neighborhood has become part of the product itself. Think plus-sized "Take me out to the ballgame."

Wrigleyville revolves around Wrigley Field and the gameday experience. And while the bars, restaurants and shops in the neighborhood cater to the local denizens, they likewise cater to the influx of fans attending Chicago Cubs home games.

As for the fabled rooftop venues, they are rowhouses with game-viewing vantage points across the street from Wrigley Field, complete with bleacher seating, sightline optimizations, food and beverage service, and group accommodations, all designed to mirror and capture the appeal of being inside the ballpark. Those rooftop venues are far from mere neighborhood rowhouses simply located across the street from Wrigley Field.

The rooftop phenomenon may have started organically as property owners realized the sightlines into the stadium had value, but it quickly developed into a deliberate, structured business model where admission was sold specifically for Cubs games. The Cubs initially resisted that dynamic but ultimately made a decision to license rooftops in 2004.

Defendant Wrigley View operated within that system for nearly 20 years. It paid royalties, used Cubs marks and presented itself as part of the Cubs gameday experience. The licensed rooftop licenses effectively extended the Cubs' product beyond the stadium walls and into the surrounding neighborhood in a controlled and revenue-generating manner.

The breakdown is straightforward. The agreement expired at the end of 2023. The Cubs negotiated new agreements with rooftop operators, and Wrigley View was the only rooftop venue to decline. In this case, the dispute is not over whether rooftops venues can exist, but whether a former licensee can continue operating a purpose-built, game-dependent business model outside the Cubs' licensing structure and asserted rights.

WT: What exactly has the Chicago Cubs team accused Wrigley View of doing?

Mark: At a practical level, the Cubs claim a former player is staying in the game after their contract terminated; i.e., Wrigley View is continuing to operate a previously authorized/licensed business without authorization.

The first layer of the Cubs' claims involves trademark infringement and false advertising. The Cubs allege that Wrigley View continued using Cubs logos and continued making statements such as "official partner," even after the license expired and it knew those statements were no longer true.

That is significant because these statements are alleged to not be simply descriptive. Wrigley View signaled endorsement and reinforced the perception that the rooftop experience is part of the Cubs' curated offerings. From the Cubs' perspective, consumer confusion is inevitable because for years, that affiliation in fact existed.

The second layer is broader. The Cubs assert misappropriation and unjust enrichment. The team claims the value of a Cubs game is not limited to what happens on the field, but includes the atmosphere, the brand and the surrounding environment. That experience is something the Cubs create and invest in and have done so for many decades.

From that perspective, Wrigley View is not just using a rowhouse across the street, it is monetizing a demand that exists only because of Cubs games. The rooftop operates only on game days, and its entire revenue stream comes from selling tickets tied to those events. The Cubs frame that less as property use and more as a business whose sole purpose is to capture the economic value of the Cubs' product.

And the facts matter here. This is not just a rowhouse with a view. The rowhouse was developed with stadium-style seating, bleachers, a skydeck and amenities that mimic the experience inside Wrigley Field.

That moves the rowhouse away from passive observation and closer to a commercial replication of the gameday experience. In practical terms, the Cubs are saying this is not just "I can see the game," it is "come pay me for a seat, food and drinks to watch a Cubs game that I did not create."

Make no mistake: Wrigley View does not invite visitors to simply walk up three flights of rowhouse stairs to hang out on an ordinary building roof to watch Cubs games from lawn chairs, while flipping burgers on portable grills and knocking back Old Styles from icebox coolers.

Much to the contrary, visitors are paying for a purpose-built venue to watch a Cubs game with permanent bleacher seating, and all the trappings of Wrigley Field located a literal ball's throw over Waveland Avenue.

Read the full Q&A: “Will the Chicago Cubs Win Their Game Over 'The Rooftop Phenomenon'?”