Now, this is not illegal, as none of these products have been patented, however it clearly indicates a lack of creativity and lack of ethics, as all they wanted to do was to get into the "truck balls" business quickly and easily.  It seems to us, that it is quite unscrupulous and allowed them to get into the "truck balls business" with minimal cost and effort and capitalizing on the popular and well known phrase "bulls balls", thereby stealing our ideas, our business and the business of other U.S. companies who produce and sell these unique 'automotive accessories'.

They use our Registered Trademark name, Bulls Balls, with one minor change, by dropping the "s" in bulls, how cute, however that does not change the fact that "bull balls" is still a violation of the trademarked name of "bulls Balls", because of the extreme close association of the two descriptive phrases.

The BULLS BALLS - formative trademark include, but not are not limited to: 'BULL BALLS', 'BULLS-BALLS', "BULL'S BALLS" and/or 'BULLS BALLZ', and all similarization of these branding labels.

You might wonder why they would copy our 'Big Boy' Style, and then call them 'bull balls'.  It is because 'Big Boys' isn't synonymous with all the names within this niche market, as is bulls balls, along with truck balls, truck nuts, bumper nuts, truck nutz and more.  BULLsBALLs.com is The Original Bulls Balls Truck Balls on the Internet and has spawned a lot of other similar U.S. companies, and that is the market they wanted to garner.

This effects not only bullsballs.com and their dealers, but all the other U.S. manufacturers and their dealers that have already developed this niche market in stores and on the Internet.  United Pacific Industries saw a great opportunity with their distribution chain to have easy pickings because the Patent Office would not allow a patent on this type of product, we tried and many others have tried also.

We are the first and only company to date, after 2 years of effort, that the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) gave a Registered Trademark in 2007 for this type of product - Bulls Balls.

More information regarding the Eight Factors for Likelihood of Confusion regarding trademark descriptive phrases:

To analyze whether a particular situation has developed the requisite "likelihood of confusion," courts have generally looked at the following eight factors.

1. the similarity in the overall impression created by the two marks (including the marks' look, phonetic similarities, and underlying meanings);
2. the similarities of the goods and services involved (including an examination of the marketing channels for the goods);
3. the strength of the plaintiff's mark;
4. any evidence of actual confusion by consumers;
5. the intent of the defendant in adopting its mark;
6. the physical proximity of the goods in the retail marketplace;
7. the degree of care likely to be exercised by the consumer; and
8. the likelihood of expansion of the product lines.

The above information supplied by Bitlaw.com