This article first appeared in Entertainment Law Matters, a Frankfurt Kurnit legal blog.

On January 7, 2012, singer Beyoncé Giselle Knowles (known professionally as "Beyoncé") and her husband, rapper and record producer Shawn Corey Carter (known professionally as "Jay-Z"), gave birth to their first child, a daughter named Blue Ivy Carter. Beyoncé's pregnancy and the arrival of Blue Ivy received an enormous amount of public attention. There were stories about the lavish suite and extensive security afforded to her parents at the New York hospital blessed with this blessed event as well as that Blue Ivy's cries were included on Jay-Z's new track "Glory" (which quickly made the Billboard R&B/Hip Hop songs chart making her the youngest performer ever to hit the charts).

But in all of the hoopla, it is possible to have missed the fact that on January 26, 2012, Beyoncé and Jay-Z applied to register the name BLUE IVY CARTER as a trademark on an intent to use basis for 15 different categories of goods and services. The trademark application was filed by BGK Trademark Holdings LLC ("BGK"), an entity that has filed other applications for protection of trademarks that include the name Beyoncé and which presumably is owned or controlled by Beyoncé and/or Jay-Z. Most of the goods and services listed in the application relate to children, but some, like "dance events by a recording artist" suggest that Blue Ivy's first appearance on the charts may not be her last.

Interestingly, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") already has acted on BGK's application, a fact that is remarkable given that it usually takes about three months for an applicant to hear anything at all. The USPTO preliminarily has refused registration in two of the classes on the ground of a preexisting registration for the mark BLUE IVY owned by a Wisconsin company and used for retail store services featuring clothing, jewelry, home and clothing accessories, and giftware. This mark was registered in August 2011 based on alleged use dating back to 2000. The USPTO also noted that an application for the name BLUE IVY CARTER GLORY IV was filed prior to the application by BGK. This application was filed on January 20, 2012 (six days before the BGK application) in the cosmetics category by a New York entity called Benton Clothier LLC. The USPTO also has preliminarily refused registration of both the BGK and the Benton Clothier application on the ground that the marks may suggest an association with the baby named Blue Ivy Carter, who is described by the USPTO as being "so famous that consumers would presume a connection" between the mark and the person. It seems that the USPTO was not aware of the likely connection between BGK and Blue Ivy Carter.

Of course, BGK may be able to overcome the preliminary objections of the USPTO. Also the mere filing of an intent to use application does not necessarily mean that BGK will receive trademark registration for any or all of the categories for which it applied. But it does suggest something else that at least some parents awaiting the big day should consider when discussing possible names for the baby. Along with thinking about the origins of potential names, cultural traditions, impact on relatives, positive and negative associations, whether you are setting up the kid for a lifetime of schoolyard teasing, etc., parents may now have to think about trademark availability. Here is the question of the day: Did Beyoncé and Jay-Z do a trademark search before choosing the name Blue Ivy Carter?

www.fkks.com

This alert provides general coverage of its subject area. We provide it with the understanding that Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz is not engaged herein in rendering legal advice, and shall not be liable for any damages resulting from any error, inaccuracy, or omission. Our attorneys practice law only in jurisdictions in which they are properly authorized to do so. We do not seek to represent clients in other jurisdictions.