Long before Kylie Jenner became famous for being famous (thanks in part to Paris Hilton and Ryan Seacrest), the only other celebrity named Kylie that I knew was Kylie Minogue. In recent years, Kylie Jenner has been building some star power of her own by receiving media attention. Now, she has her own website (that you need to pay monthly subscription to access some of her contents) and a long list of products with her name splattered all over it.
So naturally, as any smart business woman would do, Kylie Jenner has filed several trademark applications before the USPTO, one of which brings me much interest.
Kylie Jenner filed for the mark KYLIE (U.S. Application Serial No. 86/584,742) under class 35 for "advertising services, namely, promoting the brand, goods and services of others; endorsement services, namely, promoting the goods and services of others." Somehow, her application was approved for publication, allowing for opposition. And it was none other than Kylie Minogue who petitioned to oppose the registration of Kylie Jenner's application. Minogue certainly has the standing to oppose, as she owns several trademark registrations bearing her name. This fact alone is not that interesting, but this situation becomes increasingly amusing as you start reading Kylie Minogue's petition. I have attached the actual petition here, but I'd like to highlight some portions recited in the petition.
Kylie [Minogue] is a Breast Cancer Survivor...
I've seen a good number of petitions for opposition but this is definitely the one to remember. Usually, the background section in petitions don't focus so much on the applicant or the opposer, but more so on their trademarks. Here, it's pretty clear that Minogue's attorney is trying to shed some bad light on Jenner and make Minogue seem more favorable; and rightfully so because legal writing should be persuasive. But I also think that it's almost distracting to include these types of information.
Minogue has cited six registrations that she currently owns as basis for her opposition, and has solid arguments for her grounds for opposition, which include: 1) priority; 2) likelihood of confusion; and 3) dilution. Not that this proceeding would be a slam dunk for Minogue based on her legal arguments, but she probably could have appeared more diplomatic and less catty in her petition.
Jenner's answer is due April 2, 2016, and I'm very interested to see what she has to say. I have a feeling that it would be another fun read.