Not Everything Can be Trademarked - the Limitations of Celebrity

While celebrities often trademark their names and common catchphrases to protect and monetize their personal brands, there are notable limitations to the intellectual property protections they can secure. Trademarks must be used in commerce; merely registering a phrase without actual commercial use will not result in protection. Additionally, a trademark application will not be allowed if it creates a likelihood of confusion issue with an existing trademark. Furthermore, common phrases or terms that lack distinctiveness are generally not eligible for trademark protection. These constraints ensure that trademarks serve their primary purpose of distinguishing goods or services in the marketplace. So while celebrities may try to lock down their names and signature phrases they must satisfy the same legal requirements as everyone else.

GIRL NAMED KHALEESI INITIALLY REFUSED PASSPORT BASED ON GAME OF THRONES TM

CLICK HERE FOR ARTICLE ON TRAVIS KELCE TRADEMARK FILINGS.

CLICK HERE FOR ADDITIONAL CELEBRITY TM FILING CASES

CLICK HERE IF YOU ARE TRYING TO PROTECT YOUR OWN NAME

Colonel Sanders' Secret Recipe a Trade Secret No More: Family Disclosure Unveils KFC's 11 Herbs and Spices

In 2016, a relative of Colonel Harland Sanders claimed to have discovered the original KFC fried chicken recipe in a family scrapbook. A photo of the handwritten note (found on the back of a will) was publicly circulated listing the famous "11 herbs and spices" recipe. Prior to its disclosure this blend was a closely guarded trade secret and provided KFC with a competitive edge.

Maintaining the confidentiality of a trade secret is essential to preserve its status and the legal protections it affords. Once disclosed, the information loses its trade secret status and the intellectual property rights associated with that status. So if you have a secret recipe, make sure you secure that information!

CLICK HERE FOR RECIPE AND ARTICLE

Determining Copyright Ownership in AI-Generated Music: The Role of User Prompts

The question of who holds the copyright in AI-generated music, particularly when a user provides prompts, is a complex and evolving legal issue. Traditionally, copyright law requires human authorship for protection. The U.S. Copyright Office has indicated that works generated solely by AI without significant human involvement do not qualify for copyright protection. But where a user contributes creative input—such as selecting specific prompts, refining outputs, or integrating AI-generated elements into a broader composition—the resulting work may be eligible for copyright protection and the prompter may be potentially recognized as the author. In the case references below, the level of input by the prompter was minimal and therefore not protectable by copyright. It is important to understand that this area of law is still developing. Those using AI tools for music creation should stay informed about current legal standards and consult legal experts when necessary.

CLICK HERE FOR ARTICLE