Beyoncé is seeking to gain the trademark of her firstborn.
Back in 2012, Beyoncé’ had made an effort to secure the trademark through BGK Trademark Holdings LLC. Jay-Z shared his thoughts on the matter in a conversation with Vanity Fair in 2013.
“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 told the outlet. “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 1730301904 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?”
In the years that followed, Beyoncé and her team had ongoing issues with a lifestyle event planner, Veronica Morales, as she used Blue Ivy in her own business’ trademark, though that dispute was finally resolved in Beyoncé’s favor in 2020, per Billboard. However her attorneys did not move forward with the application.
In 2024, it appears the interest in the Blue Ivy Carter trademark has returned. According to the outlet, Beyoncé has filed a motion at the federal trademark office after an earlier ruling deemed that Blue Ivy Carter would conflict with a similar name owned by a Wisconsin-based clothing boutique. The business has profited from the name, Blue Ivy, since before Beyoncé gave birth to her daughter on Jan. 7, 2012.
Beyoncé’s attorneys are pushing back because they believe in securing their own trademark, the public will not mix up Blue Ivy Carter and the small 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 explained, per Billboard. “The parties each exist and thrive in their own separate worlds and can continue doing so into the future.”
At the time of this writing, the Wisconsin-based boutique is not part of the case and has not issued a motion to refute approval of Beyoncé’s trademark, per Billboard. Its mention was cited by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office as a reason to refuse her request via an application.
