The name of the star’s 7-year-old daughter, Blue Ivy Carter, is at the centre of an ongoing trade mark battle.
In January 2016, Beyoncé filed an application to register a trade mark for “Blue Ivy Carter,” which would cover goods including fragrances, cosmetics, skincare, baby teething rings, playing cards and more.
Beyoncé has attempted to trade mark “Blue Ivy Carter” which has been opposed by Wendy Morales, who claims she was using the name first. Wendy Morales, who established the “Blue Ivy” wedding planning company ten years ago, objected to Beyoncé’s application on the basis that the trade mark was already in use. Noted this did not go down well with the artist.
Beyoncé is not taking this objection sitting down. The artist has come out and is arguing that her daughter’s name is a ‘cultural icon’ in legal battle to trade mark it. It is understood that the parties are taking this matter to trial now in order to settle this matter.
Reports have provided the argument that Beyoncé putting forward.
So what are the arguments?
From what the reports indicate, Beyoncé denies all claims that the registration would confuse consumers what she has stated to be ‘the daughter of two of the world’s most well-known performers – and the wedding planning business.’
Beyoncé has spoken out and calls the claims to be ‘frivolous’ and argues they should be ‘refused in their entirety’. Beyoncé arguments also points out that the trade mark application is for Blue Ivy’s full name, Blue Ivy Carter, and not Blue Ivy which is the prior registered mark.
The artist’s claim of the presence of the addition wording of ‘Carter’ ties the ‘commercial impression of her own trade mark to the celebrity fame of Blue Ivy Carter.
Taking no prisoners her, Beyoncé comments that Morales’ wedding business is a ‘small business with just three regional offices and a handful of employees’ and later adding it has a ‘weak online presence and poorly subscribed social media accounts.’ (She is really getting her teeth into this one).
But what has raised eyebrows here, is the artist’s claim that her even-year-old daughter Blue Ivy as a “cultural icon” and a “mini style star.” That being said her life and activities are followed extensively by the media and the public. Beyoncé comments can be linked to her recent collaboration with her daughter on her Lion King Soundtrack album The Gift, which made Blue Ivy the youngest female artist in history to appear on the Billboard Hot 100 chart.
Now most of the arguments brought forward to defend the claim would be how most lawyers would proceed in a matter such as this but trade mark registration is set up those owner to enforce and oppose applications which could be confusingly similar to registered owners brands and trade mark registration. It’s in the registered owner’s arsenal of tools to enforce and have protection over their brand name, so they should use this when such issue and matters occur and as we can see here it’s not being an easy ride for Beyoncé. Every situation is different and different matters arise in different scenarios so how this matter is settled is one to defiantly keep an eye on especially for those that are breaking into the fame and glory of being a celebrity.
Briffa advises on all aspects of trade mark law and practice and offers free consultations to all new clients. If you would like to have a call or a meeting at our offices in the Business Design Centre in London, please call 020 7288 6003 or email firstname.lastname@example.org.
Written by Hasnath Ahmed, Solicitor