This thread led me down a procrastination rabbit hole to see how aggressively PSU defends their TMs, and it turns out ... quite aggressive. This
2019 federal complaint finds PSU suing a website--GOPSURV.com--which you can probably guess from the domain rents RVs for football games and has done so for 10 years. The basis for the infringement claim is that they use "PSU" in the domain name and the site's logo, and that the lion's head logo incidentally appears
within the photos of the RVs for rent (e.g., wall decorations, refrigerator magnets, etc.).
It'd be actual work to competently analyze these claims, so I'll just say they range from thin to crazy. Looking at that website, there's simply no way any consumer is confused as to whether PSU is responsible for it. Moreover, PSU doesn't offer a competing service, pointing only to its transportation.psu.edu page, which just isn't in the same ballpark. That's not to say those are the only concerns, but they're key unfavorable facts for PSU.
The case is still in litigation, probably slowed somewhat by the pandemic. In December a judge rejected a discovery attempt by the defendant to depose James Franklin over some he-said/she-said nonsense, but I'm unaware of whether the case survived a motion to dismiss.
Months prior to filing the 2019 complaint, PSU
lost a UDRP decision as to the goPSUrv.com domain name. (The UDRP is an ICANN mechanism--effectively international law--to decide trademark claims as to only domain names themselves.)
Anyway, my only point was really that the University is pretty aggressive about trademark enforcement because I think most other entities let marginal things like this slip by. In PSU's defense, TM law incentivizes aggressive enforcement, probably too much IMO, inasmuch as you can weaken or dilute your TM (and thus future arguments) by allowing minor infringements.