Legal Question in Business Law in California

I would start by asking them to prove that they have a registered trademark.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The above response is not intended to, and does not, create an attorney-client, fiduciary or other confidential relationship with the responder. Neither does it constitute the providing of legal advice or services or the giving of a legal opinion by the responder. Such a relationship can only be created, and legal advice and/or legal services provided, pursuant to a written agreement with the responder. Accordingly, no obligations of any kind are assumed with respect to any matter or question presented. It should also be noted that legal issues are often time sensitive and legal rights may be lost or compromised if you do not act in a timely fashion.

I did a little checking, and it looks like they're claiming COMMON LAW trademark rights... having a registered domain (since 2002), etc. Interestingly, the site at witchmade.com doesn't have any products or services listed, only a 'statement' about the use of the TM symbol, etc. So it doesn't look like they're actually using the mark AS A TRADEMARK.

You could probably win a fight with them over this. Please call me if you'd like to explore this further.

DISCLAIMER: NO ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP

Nothing contained in this message shall be deemed or construed as establishing an attorney-client relationship. The information provided herein is general in nature and should not be relied upon as legal advice. If you require specific legal advice, there is no substitute for custom-tailored advice from an attorney you have hired to represent you. No obligations of any kind are assumed with respect to any matter or question presented. It should also be noted that legal issues are often time sensitive and legal rights may be lost or compromised if you do not act in a timely fashion.

I went to the trademark office Web site at www.uspto.gov and did a basic search for "witch made" (two words). No such mark is registered. Maybe you should consider applying for the mark yourself, assuming you are eligible based on use or intent to use it in interstate commerce. The USPTO may eventually rule that the mark is too generic to be registered, but such a finding could then be shown to others as proof of sorts that claims to exclusive rights in the phrase are not enforceable.

Also, this "mark" appears to be a "descriptive mark" in trademark lingo, i.e. a mark that describes either the goods or a characteristic of the goods. It is difficult to enforce common law trademark rights for descriptive marks unless the mark has acquired a secondary meaning, which in this case (recent use and no ascertainable products or services associated with the "mark") appears very dubious.

Proviso: My response does not constitute legal advice, as I do not know all of the relevant facts of your case, and I do not legally represent you. Although I strive to make sure the information I provide is generally accurate and useful, you should promptly consult an able lawyer who can learn the unique details of your case more completely in a confidential relationship to ensure that the information I provide, and your interpretation of it, is appropriate to your particular situation.

Contact: If you would like to discuss this matter further in a more private forum, please feel free to contact me directly at the email address provided through Law Guru or through my firm�s website located at BealBusinessLaw.com.