KYLIE trade mark battle spinning around

It's clear from the hair alone that
Kylie (right) has been famous for a long time 
Kylie Minogue first sprang to fame as Charlene Robinson in Neighbours. Since then she has had an international pop career with hits such as The Locomotion, I Should Be So Lucky and Can't Get You Out of My Head.

The dispute began back in April 2015 when Kylie Jenner (a member of the Kardashian family) attempted to register KYLIE in the USA for advertising and endorsement services.

Kylie Minogue opposed the application.  It is rare for oppositions to be quoted in the press, but the description of Jenner as a "secondary reality television personality" has been repeated in almost every report of the dispute.

On 19 January 2017 Kylie Minogue withdrew her opposition fuelling speculation that a settlement has been reached.  Given the value of the mark to both Kylies it is fair to assume that a reasonable amount of money changed hands.

Kylie Jenner
Kylie Jenner has been on a trade mark filing spree.  

For example, in December 2016 she applied to register KYLIE for retail store services featuring gifts, general consumer merchandise, apparel, apparel accessories, calendars, gift wrap, phone cases, pins and buttons.  But she is not alone... a recent application for KYLIE BEAUTY for various hair accessories including false beards; False hair; False moustaches may give the Kylie's a common foe to unite against in the future. 

Watch out for all the Kylie merchandise coming to a store near you. 
KYLIE trade mark battle spinning around KYLIE trade mark battle spinning around Reviewed by Rosie Burbidge on Thursday, February 09, 2017 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.