As reported by AFROTECH, Beyoncé is re-energizing her efforts to secure trademark rights for her firstborn, Blue Ivy Carter. The music icon initially sought the trademark in 2012 through her entity, BGK Trademark Holdings LLC. Jay-Z, Beyoncé's husband, previously addressed this pressing issue during an interview with Vanity Fair in 2013, highlighting the challenges of protecting their child's name from commercial exploitation.
“People wanted to make products based on our child’s name, and you don’t want anybody trying to benefit off your baby’s name. It wasn’t for us to do anything; as you see, we haven’t done anything,” Jay-Z confessed to Vanity Fair. He added, “First of all, it’s a child, and it bothers me when there’s no [boundaries]. I come from the streets, and even in the most atrocious sh-t we were doing, we had lines: no kids, no mothers — there was respect there. But [now] there’s no boundaries. For somebody to say, ‘This person had a kid — I’m gonna make a f-ckin’ stroller with that kid’s name.’ It’s, like, where’s the humanity?”
Following this, Beyoncé encountered legal hurdles in her quest for the trademark, most notably a dispute with lifestyle event planner Veronica Morales, who had used the name Blue Ivy in her business endeavors. Ultimately, this matter was resolved in Beyoncé's favor in 2020, as reported by Billboard. Nevertheless, her legal team did not pursue the trademark application further at that time.
Fast forward to 2024, and it seems that Beyoncé's interest in the Blue Ivy Carter trademark has been reignited. Recent reports indicate that she has filed a motion with the federal trademark office after an initial ruling determined that her desired trademark could conflict with a name held by a clothing boutique in Wisconsin. The boutique, which has been utilizing the name Blue Ivy since before the birth of Beyoncé's daughter on January 7, 2012, has reportedly profited from this trademark.
Beyoncé’s legal representatives are contesting the earlier ruling, arguing that the public is unlikely to confuse Blue Ivy Carter with the smaller boutique. “Since the moment she was born, she has resided in the American public’s conscience and thus … the consuming public would associate her with a trademark bearing her name,” BGK attorneys articulated, as noted by Billboard. “The parties each exist and thrive in their own separate worlds and can continue doing so into the future.”
As of this writing, the Wisconsin-based boutique has yet to be included in the trademark dispute and has not filed any motions opposing Beyoncé’s application, according to Billboard. The boutique was brought up by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office as a justification for initially denying Beyoncé’s trademark request.
In a counter-argument, Beyoncé's attorneys maintain, “No reasonable consumer would ever suffer any form of confusion when encountering the [store’s] logo, which is used with one small shop in Fish Creek, Wisconsin, an unincorporated community with a population of approximately 997 people,” they wrote. Additionally, they asserted, “Nor would a reasonable consumer encounter the ‘Blue Ivy Carter’ mark and conclude that the famous Carter family had teamed up with a small shop in rural Wisconsin to launch a clothing line.”
Comments