Fashion, Entertainment, First Class News Updates on the Hour Every Hour, Gossip, Social Media Marketing n generally in d Biz to keep Y'all Well Entertained.... For Brand Promos and Advert Placements, Contact us on firstname.lastname@example.org
Like iRelate's Facebook Page!!! Show Your Support!!!
Click Banner To Get The Best Deals From KONGA...
Saturday, 30 December 2017
Beyonce Loses Out On Private Deposition Bid In Trademark Lawsuit
An appeals board shut down Beyonce‘s request to keep her upcoming deposition private in her trademark battle over daughter Blue Ivy Carter‘s name.
After the birth of Blue Ivy in 2012, the “Drunk in Love” hitmaker filed legal papers with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to trademark “Blue Ivy Carter”.
However, Beyonce’s application didn’t sit well with Veronica Morales, who owned an event planning firm, Blue Ivy Company. Morales said the trademark was too similar to the name of her event planning firm, and she took legal action against the Carters.
Morales won an earlier ruling denying the Carters’ request to use Blue Ivy’s name for commercial purposes.
In her application, Beyonce sought to reserve the rights to use the name in beauty, fashion, and electronics ventures or to prevent others from cashing in on her daughter’s identity.
Apparently Beyonce and JAY-Z assumed the public would be eager to snap up merchandise such as Blue Ivy dolls and Blue Ivy clothing.
The 38-year-old Burlesque dancer filed another trademark application earlier this year (2017).
Morales served the singer with a notice to sit for a deposition in the case.
In September, Beyonce’s lawyers filed court documents requesting a protective order which would ban details about the time and location of the deposition and what Beyonce says about her family. Beyonce did not want the deposition to be made public because she was concerned for her family’s safety, according to WENN.com.
via WENN.com — Their request has now been shut down by members of the Trademark Trial and Appeal board, who ruled earlier this week that they didn’t find their arguments about Beyonce’s fears for her family’s safety persuasive and denied the motion.
When Beyonce’s lawyers filed the request, they said the order would help minimize the “intrusive use for security” for Beyonce and the venue and “reduce the dangerous pandemonium that so often marks Mrs. Carter’s public appearances”.
Morales claims she started her company three years before the child was born and had already secured a trademark. It’s the second time the party planners have objected to Beyonce’s trademark attempts – the singer previously lost her bid to secure the rights to “Blue Ivy” for commercial use shortly after her little girl’s arrival in 2012.