Sam Joseph Karam, an online apparel seller on Etsy, was surprised when he received an email from the platform stating that 11 of his T-shirt designs featuring the term “bruh” had been removed due to a trademark violation. This was an unusual occurrence for Karam, as typically only one or two listings are affected. The removal of his designs also led to the loss of his Star Seller badge, impacting his sales.
The trademark violation was reported by Malik Yawar Abbas, the holder of the Canadian trademark for “bruh.” Karam and other Etsy sellers shared similar experiences of having their items taken down following complaints from Abbas. Karam accused Abbas of “trademark squatting,” suggesting that Abbas aimed to profit by licensing the term rather than using it for his own products.
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office issued a trademark for “bruh” in connection with clothing sales in July 2025. Another trademark for the same term was granted to Abbas for advertising restaurant services. Karam discovered Abbas’s website emphasizing the protection of the trademark and offering licensing options for its use, rather than selling actual products.
Abbas demanded $1,000 from Karam to withdraw the complaint regarding the takedowns, but Karam refused, deeming it bad faith behavior. Despite Abbas withdrawing the complaint after the designs were removed, Karam is exploring legal options to challenge the trademark’s validity on grounds of bad faith.
Legal expert Carys Craig mentioned that trademarks filed in bad faith can be invalidated under Canadian law. The use of the “bruh” trademark by Abbas and the takedown requests could potentially meet the criteria for bad faith. However, the final decision on this matter remains uncertain.
While general terms and pop culture phrases can be trademarked based on context, trademarking does not equate to owning the word outright. Experts suggest that the use of “bruh” on clothing items might not necessarily infringe on the trademark, depending on how it is used.
Etsy’s response to trademark takedown requests and the lack of an appeal process for sellers pose challenges. Clancy highlighted the complexity of trademark enforcement and the need for clearer guidelines to prevent cases like Karam’s.
In conclusion, the “bruh” trademark dispute underscores the need for improved trademark regulations and enforcement processes to protect sellers and prevent potential trademark abuse in the future.