The owners of the famous TD Garden sports arena in Boston have filed a lawsuit against a local medical marijuana dispensary operating under the name “The Boston Garden.” The sports moguls claim that the shop’s branding is too similar to the name of the legendary old stadium — “The Boston Garden” — which closed its doors back in 1995.
TD Garden is the home of the city’s iconic teams: the NHL’s Boston Bruins and the NBA’s Boston Celtics. The cannabis shop is located in Cambridge, just a 10-minute drive from the arena.
What Is the Essence of the Claims?
Delaware North, the company that owns the stadium, alleges that the similarity between the names is “misleading to the public” and causes “irreparable harm.” According to the plaintiffs, an average resident might mistakenly believe that the marijuana dispensary is somehow affiliated with the sports arena or has received its endorsement.
In the lawsuit, the company demands:
-
Injunctive relief to prohibit the use of the name.
-
Destruction of all materials (signage, packaging, etc.) bearing the “unlawful” brand.
The stadium owners’ main argument is that “The Boston Garden” remains one of the most recognizable brands in the city’s sports history. This is despite the fact that the old building was demolished in the late ’90s, and the new arena (TD Garden), built just inches away, has never officially used the old name.
The Small Business’s Defense
The owners of “The Boston Garden” dispensary insist they were not trying to copy anyone. Jonathan Tucker, a co-owner of the business, stated that before opening, they hired attorneys to conduct a thorough trademark clearance search.
“We didn’t just pull this out of thin air or search on Google. We followed all the legal steps,” he said.
Back in 2020, they officially registered the trademark “The Boston Garden” for smoking accessories and their website. According to the owners, the stadium’s lawyers only began sending “cease and desist” letters demanding they drop the name a year and a half ago.
The small business owners say they considered rebranding, but it would cost approximately $500,000. When they asked the billionaire stadium owners to help cover these costs, the request was flatly rejected.
“We aren’t going to give up just because a billionaire family wants our name. No customer confuses us with a sports arena. We believe the law is on our side.”
Jonathan Tucker adds that this lawsuit threatens the very existence of his company: “We are just a local business serving our community. It’s intimidating — we are up against a very influential and wealthy out-of-town family, even though we did everything by the book.”
The Plaintiff’s Counter-Position
Delaware North maintains that they have acted reasonably. They point out that the “Boston Garden” brand has been linked to the city’s history since 1928 and that they hold all valid registrations for the name. They claim they spent years trying to resolve the issue amicably and still hope for a settlement.
The Legal Question
The central question for the court is: Can the name of a stadium that hasn’t existed for 30 years prevent a shop selling an entirely different product from operating? This is a classic dispute over the scope of protection for “legacy” brands.
Do you think anyone could truly confuse a basketball arena with a cannabis shop because of a similar name?
Founder of Research & Patent group Intectica, author of patent algorithms for solving problems in the pharmaceutical industry, patent attorney certified in all intellectual property objects (Patents, Design, TM), with education in chemistry and law, chief expert of the patent institution of Ukraine UKRPATENT (1997-2004). Member of international organizations, including ECTA, PTMG, UAM, lecturer and blogger.
