I had a nice little business going on selling t shirts at my local college football games. Thats until I got busted by the trade mark police. They confiscated 57 shirts and gave me a ticket wich I have to appear in court for in two weeks.
The question is , what exactly does the trade mark imply ? One of the shirts said
"DON'T BRUIN YOUR LIFE". The UCLA trade mark person said that BRUIN was the trade mark ,but the team name is The Bruins, or the UCLA Bruins.
A bruin is a name for a bitch bear and is a general word?. Does any one know any thing about trade marks?

If they have registered it, and the context in which it can be used, it is trademarked and theirs. It sounds pretty general to me. I would see just what they have registered. You could purchase usage of it, usually requires you to pay a fee for each use on a product.
Oh, I'm not a lawyer and don't play one one the 'net.

It would appear that you have a case. I quick check of the US Patent and Tradmark Office shows that they own the Trademark "UCLA Bruins", but not the word Bruin.

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=rno4t2.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=bruin&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query

Trademarks seem straightforward enough. But like many other things, money and lawyers can figure in. Here's an example.

Upon learning that Australian bootmakers had never trademarked the term "Uggs," an American conglomerate trademarked it themselves. Now, unless you are a careful shopper, you can end up with your feet dyed black. It's all legal. Yes, I finally got the dye off my feet.

I'm nopt a lawyer but being in the fashion industry I've been involved in my share of trademark cases.

You have a very tough fight on your hands. If they formerly trademarked BRUINS and have used the word BRUIN (singular) and declared trademark using the little TM symbol you have no case. Just because a word is in common usage does not mean it can't be taken as a trademark. ALso a word does not have to be formally registered to be declared a trademark and afforded protection.

I can't imagine the ticket costing you much, they're not out to ruin hyou, just to stop you from using that word. An apology and a small fine are a lot cheaper than the thousands it will cost you in legal fees. Just come up with a new design and you can even ask them if they will give ou a license to use the name on that design, you pay them a small royalty and you're legal. It could greatly increase our business.

they're not out to ruin you, just to stop you from using that word. Wouldn't that be, they're not out to "Bruin" you? Oh oh, :lookround: did I just violate a trademark too? If they have a trademark on the word Bruin (or any variation of the word), would the Boston Bruins NHL team be in violation of UCLA Bruins trademark or would UCLA Bruins be in violation of the Boston Bruins trademark or are you violating both the UCLA Bruins and the Boston Bruins trademark? :eh:

He's technically violating both of them! Obviously his sale of t-shirts at UCLA Bruins games is use of their name at one of their events collecting money and not paying them.

As far as two teams with the same name that's because they are used in conjunction with another word such as Boston or UCLA. One of my trademarks, Dominique France, is an example. The word France isn't trademarked but compromises part of a trademarked name.

One of my trademarks, Dominique France, is an example. The word France isn't trademarked but compromises part of a trademarked name. Then wouldn't the word Bruin be the same as in your case with the word France...you can trademark the name Dominique France, but not the word France, and in his case you can trademark the name UCLA Bruins but not the word bruin. On the other hand I gotta wonder if this really isn't just a case of him selling items at a UCLA Bruins event without permission, or the knowledge of it by UCLA and more than likely not even a vendors license issued by the city...and that's what UCLA is ticked off about in the first place. I would be willing to bet that had he gone through the proper procedure and paid a royalty fee to UCLA and had a vendors license from the city, he wouldn't be going to court over this...they just wanted a cut of his profits up front for use of the name. I'm also willing to bet that the judge will give him a slap on the wrist and a small fine...he's not going to kick him in the gonads and "Bruin" him for life...but I also bet the T-shirts will remain confiscated and destroyed as part of the court agreement by UCLA to drop charges. Next time (if there is a next time) go through the proper channels to do it legally and it would probably help if you made a monetary donation of some type to UCLA (besides the royalty fee)...build them a new library, chemistry lab or something or better yet...just get out of the T-shirt business, it'd be cheaper !

[quote="LeoC2"]He's technically violating both of them! Obviously his sale of t-shirts at UCLA Bruins games is use of their name at one of their events collecting money and not paying them.

Isn't this the real issue here?

[quote=LeoC2]He's technically violating both of them! Obviously his sale of t-shirts at UCLA Bruins games is use of their name at one of their events collecting money and not paying them.

Isn't this the real issue here?

Sounds like "follow the money" to me.

So why don't you just trademark "DON'T BRUIN YOUR LIFE" yourself?