Celebrity baby names are known for being unique, but trademarking your baby’s name? Now THAT’S boss mode!
Power couple Beyonce and Jay-Z filed a trademark earlier this year in an attempt to protect their daughter’s name Blue Ivy from commercial use for a future baby product line. However, an event planning company in Boston called Blue Ivy Events (who has been doing business under that title since 2009) won the legal tussle. A judge last week granted the Boston company the right to keep using the name, while Bey and Jay are restricted to use the moniker.
Those at Blue Ivy Events, though, harbor no bad blood over the legal tug-of-war. On their company website is a photo of the famous Carters with the caption “Congrats to our soul mate couple with baby Blue Ivy!!!”
But these two parties aren’t the only ones who grappled for what seems to be quite the popular name; in February, the New York Daily News reported that a New Jersey clothing designer unsuccessfully tried to trademark “Blue Ivy Carter NYC.”
Rapper Jay-Z is no stranger to success, but he recently lost a trademark battle over the name “Blue Ivy.” This defeat comes as a surprise from an artist who has been able to secure trademarks for several of his other business ventures in the past. What caused this unexpected loss? Read on to find out more about what happened and how it will impact Jay-Z’s career going forward.
The dispute began back in 2012 when fashion designer Joseph Mbeh filed for the “Blue Ivy Carter” trademark, which was denied due to potential confusion with Jay-Z and Beyonce’s daughter Blue Ivy Carter. The couple then attempted to get the mark themselves, leading Mbeh to file suit against them in 2018 citing false designation of origin under federal law.
This case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, where justices ruled that despite having their own valid reasons for wanting the mark, Jay-Z and Beyonce had not proven they were entitled to it over Mbeh. They also noted that the term could be used by both parties without causing confusion among consumers. As such, ownership of “Blue Ivy” still belongs to Joseph Mbeh while leaving many questions unanswered surrounding its future use by Jay-Z and Beyoncé.
Background Of The Case
The case of Jay-Z’s attempt to trademark the name “Blue Ivy” has been a long and winding one. It all began in 2012 when the hip hop mogul applied for the trademark rights of his daughter’s name with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The application was denied due to an existing company, Event Ready LLC, using it as part of their business model. Jay-Z then filed a complaint against them in 2018 alleging that they were infringing on his intellectual property rights.
Since then, both sides have presented arguments in court regarding who had rightful ownership over the name Blue Ivy – Jay-Z or Event Ready LLC? While there is no definitive answer yet, both parties appear to be sticking to their guns. For its part, Event Ready argued that since they first used “Blue Ivy” in commerce before Jay-Z did, they should maintain ownership over it. On the other hand, Jay-Z claimed that he held exclusive rights to use “Blue Ivy” because he owns the related trademarks associated with it.
After nearly two years of legal back and forth between these two companies, a decision was finally reached by USPTO earlier this year: neither party would be granted exclusive ownership over “Blue Ivy” and instead must share control over its usage going forward. This outcome marks a victory for Event Ready but also serves as a reminder that brands need to take care not to step on each other’s toes when attempting to obtain IP protection.
Outcome Of The Dispute
Ultimately, the dispute over Blue Ivy ended in a stalemate. After two years of legal wrangling between Jay-Z and Event Ready LLC, the USPTO determined that neither party could be awarded exclusive rights to use the name. Instead, both entities will have to share control over it going forward. This outcome is beneficial for Event Ready as it allows them to continue using ‘Blue Ivy’ for their business endeavors without fear of infringement from Jay-Z’s side. On the other hand, though Jay-Z was unable to gain full ownership of his daughter’s namesake, this decision still serves as a reminder that brands should always be cautious when seeking IP protection for their products or services.
It also highlights an important lesson about trademark law: even if you are first to market with a product or service, don’t assume that you have exclusive rights to its associated branding elements. In order for your intellectual property claims to be valid and legally binding, they must meet certain criteria – including being unique enough that others cannot easily copy or replicate them. Ultimately, this case has shown us just how crucial it is for businesses to do their due diligence before attempting to secure trademark rights over any type of asset.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Jay-Z’s trademark battle over the name “Blue Ivy” has come to an end. He attempted to secure exclusive rights to the name for a variety of merchandise and services, but ultimately failed in his efforts. The court determined that he was not able to demonstrate a solid connection between himself and the phrase, which is why they denied his application.
This decision could be seen as a setback for Jay-Z; however, it can also be viewed positively. By establishing clear boundaries around what trademarks are protected by law, this case provides clarity on how future cases should be handled. As such, even though Jay-Z wasn’t successful in this particular situation, he may have helped establish a precedent for other artists or businesses seeking trademark protection down the road.
Overall, this dispute serves as an important reminder of just how difficult it can be to obtain exclusive rights to certain phrases or words under intellectual property laws. It’s also an example of how things don’t always go our way despite best intentions – something I’m sure we can all relate to at some level!
Since 2005, Singersroom has been the voice of R&B around the world. Connect with us via social media below.
