A familiar piece of internet slang has become the centre of an unexpectedly serious cross-border business fight. U.S. Etsy merchants selling “bruh”-themed clothing have had listings removed after complaints tied to a Canadian trademark registration, with one seller saying the disruption was followed by an immediate sales decline. The Canadian trademark holder, Malik Yawar Abbas, rejects accusations that he is merely “squatting” on a popular word and says BRUH is being developed as a legitimate licensing brand. Behind the clash lies a much larger question for online merchants: what happens when nationally registered trademark rights collide with ordinary language, internet culture and marketplaces that sell across borders? Canadian law gives registered trademark owners substantial protection, but legal experts say registration does not automatically make every decorative or conversational use of a word an infringement.
Eleven Listings Disappear, Then Sales Fall
The dispute became tangible for Sam Joseph Karam when Etsy removed 11 T-shirt listings carrying the word “bruh.” Karam, who runs U.S.-based Customized Designs, said the cluster of removals stood out because infringement complaints typically affected only one or two listings at a time. He also said Etsy revoked his Star Seller badge and that sales dropped immediately afterward. That badge is not a direct search-ranking factor, according to Etsy, but the company says it helps shoppers identify sellers with a strong customer-service record.
CBC News reported that Karam was not alone. It reviewed Etsy emails sent to him and two other sellers showing that the takedowns followed complaints from Canadian trademark holder Malik Yawar Abbas. The episode illustrates how a dispute rooted in Canadian trademark rights can quickly affect U.S. merchants operating on a borderless marketplace, especially when their listings remain visible to shoppers in Canada on the platform.
The Canadian Clothing Trademark Is Real and Active
The legal foundation of Abbas’s complaint is not imaginary: “BRUH” is an active Canadian registration covering an unusually long list of clothing and footwear goods in Nice Class 25. Canadian Intellectual Property Office records show the application was filed on August 30, 2024, registered on July 25, 2025, and is scheduled to expire on July 25, 2035 unless renewed. The registration lists Malik Yawar Abbas of Oshawa, Ontario, as the owner.
Registration matters because Canada’s Trademarks Act gives the owner of a valid registered mark the exclusive right to use it throughout Canada for the goods and services covered. That right is territorial, however. Canadian government guidance makes clear that registration in Canada protects the mark in Canada, not automatically in other countries. For American Etsy sellers, the practical complication is that an online listing created in the United States can still be offered to Canadian customers through cross-border commerce.
BRUH Now Covers Hospitality Services Too
The apparel registration is only part of the picture. CIPO records show a second “BRUH” registration owned by Yawar Abbas, this one covering a broad range of restaurant and hospitality services in Nice Class 43. That application was filed on July 31, 2025 and registered on August 14, 2026, with an expiry date in August 2036. The listed services stretch from cafés and takeout restaurants to catering, bars, restaurant reservations and delivery-related restaurant services.
The expanding portfolio helps explain why Abbas describes BRUH as a commercial licensing brand rather than a single T-shirt label. His website promotes licensing and partnerships in apparel and hospitality and describes the Canadian registrations as core intellectual property. None of that settles whether any particular Etsy shirt infringes the apparel registration, but it does show that the rights being asserted sit within a broader branding strategy rather than a one-off complaint against a single seller.
A $1,000 Proposal Fuels the “Squatting” Accusation
What intensified Karam’s concern was what happened after the takedowns. According to CBC’s reporting, he contacted Abbas seeking withdrawal of the Etsy complaint and was presented with proposed terms that included a $1,000 payment. Karam refused and characterized the situation as evidence of “trademark squatting,” arguing that the registration was being used primarily to extract licensing payments rather than identify merchandise produced by the owner. That remains Karam’s allegation, not a legal finding.
Abbas rejected that interpretation. He told CBC the $1,000 figure was part of a proposed settlement in a disputed trademark matter, that no payment was made and that no monetary settlement was reached. He said BRUH is a lawfully registered Canadian trademark being developed as a licensing brand. Licensing itself is an ordinary and recognized use of trademark rights: CIPO explicitly notes that registered trademarks can generate revenue through licensing or franchising agreements under Canadian trademark law.
Abbas Says Enforcement Is Not Bad Faith
Abbas has disputed the accusation that enforcing the registration amounts to bad faith. He told CBC he registered the term to build a licensing-focused brand when, he said, no BRUH-named brand existed in Canada. He said reporting Etsy listings reflected a belief they might conflict with his rights, and that his intention was not to stop ordinary conversation or use of the slang word. He later withdrew the complaint involving Karam’s 11 designs after those products were no longer offered to Canadian consumers.
That distinction matters because controversy is not the same thing as a court judgment. Canada’s Trademarks Act allows a registration to be declared invalid when an application was filed in bad faith, but no ruling cited in the reporting has made that finding against Abbas. Karam said he was consulting an intellectual-property lawyer and considering a challenge; that is a contemplated legal step, not a decided case.
“Bruh” Existed Long Before This Trademark
Part of the public reaction comes from the familiarity of the word itself. “Bruh” is not a newly invented corporate expression. Cambridge Dictionary describes it as mainly U.S. informal speech used to address a friend or express reactions such as surprise or disagreement. Merriam-Webster traces documented use to the nineteenth century and identifies roots in African American English. Its long life in everyday language makes a trademark claim feel counterintuitive to many sellers and shoppers.
Trademark law, however, does not ask whether a word is common in every context. The question is whether it functions to distinguish one source of goods or services from another. A familiar word can therefore be registrable for products it does not describe. Canadian law bars clearly descriptive terms, but “bruh” does not describe the material, quality or function of a T-shirt. That is why cultural use and trademark registration can coexist, at least initially.
A Word on a Shirt Is Not Automatically Infringement
Even a valid registration does not automatically make every appearance of the word on clothing an infringement. Intellectual-property lawyer Paula Clancy told CBC that context matters, including whether the challenged use acts as a source identifier or simply appears ornamentally as part of a design. A phrase printed across the front of a shirt may raise a different legal question from “BRUH” used as a label, hangtag or brand name. She said a Karam design using the phrase “Bruh, we back” might fall within a non-infringing category.
Canadian law focuses infringement on unauthorized commercial use associated with a confusing trademark or trade name. That makes presentation, consumer perception and the relationship between the mark and goods important. For small Etsy shops, however, those distinctions may never receive hearing. A platform takedown can arrive long before either side spends the money required to test confusion, ornamentation or trademark use in court.
Etsy’s Takedown System Gives Complaints Immediate Weight
Etsy’s enforcement process is central to why the dispute has commercial consequences. The company’s intellectual-property policy says Etsy is not in a position to make legal determinations about whether a seller’s content infringes someone else’s rights. Instead, when it receives an infringement report that complies with its policies, it removes or disables the identified material and informs the seller. Etsy also says it can reject reports it believes are false, fraudulent, incomplete or submitted in bad faith.
Options differ depending on the intellectual property. Etsy provides a DMCA counter-notice mechanism for copyright complaints, but its guidance for trademark removals tells sellers to contact the reporting party or consider speaking with a lawyer. CBC reported Karam said he was not given an internal route to appeal the trademark takedown. For a small merchant, that structure can turn a disputed legal claim into a business problem before a court considers the merits.
Canadian Law Offers Ways to Challenge a Registration
Canadian law offers ways for attacking a registration, although none is instantaneous. Section 18 of the Trademarks Act states that a registration is invalid if the application was filed in bad faith. Canada also allows parties to challenge registrations for non-use after the three-year period. Under section 45, the owner can be required to show use of the trademark in Canada during the preceding three years or explain special circumstances justifying non-use; otherwise the registration may be expunged or narrowed.
Those mechanisms matter in a licensing-focused dispute because Canadian law does not require every registrant to manufacture goods personally. CIPO expressly recognizes licensing as a way trademarks can generate revenue. At the same time, use remains important to maintaining rights. CIPO says a section 45 proceeding can take two to four years or longer, underscoring why litigation and administrative challenges may be impractical for a seller whose listings disappear today.
A Small Trademark Fight Raises a Much Bigger Marketplace Problem
The BRUH dispute exposes tension in global marketplaces: national trademark rights can be enforced through platforms whose sellers and buyers span jurisdictions. Etsy has incentives to respond quickly to infringement notices, while independent merchants may lack resources to challenge a registration or litigate whether a design is confusing. The result can be a large practical effect from a legal question that has never been decided by a judge.
For now, the facts remain narrower than the online argument. Abbas holds active Canadian registrations and denies squatting or bad faith. Karam says the takedowns harmed his business and is considering legal action. Canadian experts cited by CBC say the case may test boundaries around bad-faith filings, ornamental use and marketplace enforcement. Until a court, the Registrar or the parties resolve those issues, the fight over “bruh” remains a dispute over scope and enforcement—not proof that one side’s legal position has prevailed.
