Victoria Beckham Trademarked Brooklyn's Birth Name: Legal Implications Explained

Victoria Beckham Trademarked Brooklyn's Birth Name: Legal Implications Explained

Brooklyn Peltz Beckham, the eldest son of Sir David Beckham and Victoria Beckham, had his birth name trademarked on behalf of his mother in 2017. This legal move has gained renewed attention following Brooklyn's recent public allegations that his parents prioritise 'Brand Beckham' over family, raising questions about the 26-year-old's rights to his own name.

What Victoria Beckham Did for Her Children

According to records from the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), a trade mark serves as a distinctive sign that differentiates goods and services from competitors, protecting names or brands from unauthorised commercial use. Brooklyn, along with his three siblings Romeo, Cruz and Harper Beckham, all had their birth names registered with the IPO in 2017.

The trade mark covers an extensive range of goods and services including cosmetics, books, clothing and toys. This means if any of the Beckham children wish to use their names to brand such products, they must first seek permission from Lady Beckham, who currently owns the rights. The registration is due for renewal in December 2026, potentially offering Brooklyn an opportunity to reclaim the rights if his mother chooses not to renew it.

The Growing Trend of Name Trademarks

Alex Taylor, partner in the Intellectual Property, Commercial and Technology team at Withers, notes that trademarking names has become increasingly popular in recent years. "It's becoming even more common now, especially in the last few years, where you have people, celebrities, sports stars, athletes," he explained. "Once you have your name registered as a mark, it gives far more control over your brand."

How Brooklyn Could Reclaim His Name Rights

Mr Taylor suggests the simplest approach would involve negotiation: "I think it depends on how willing Victoria, the owner of his name or the trade mark of his name, is to either enter into some type of co-existence agreement or to agree a licence with it. That, I think, is the most simple way of doing it."

He continued: "If they want to maintain any type of relationship moving forward, then that would seem to me to most obvious way of doing it. However, if there is genuine animosity between the pair and Victoria and David are set on controlling the name and see value in it moving forward, then I think it will be more difficult. It will be hard and very expensive to try to litigate this."

Potential Legal Challenges

If Brooklyn requested the rights to his name and Lady Beckham objected, the matter could proceed to a hearing. Nick Aries, intellectual property partner at Bird & Bird, suggests this wouldn't necessarily be the "end of the line" for Brooklyn.

"There may be scope to challenge the validity of those registrations if they are misleading, for example, if they imply a commercial connection with Brooklyn that no longer exists," Aries explained. "His contract with his parents might limit his ability to bring such a challenge, but someone else could. Another angle might be to challenge the ownership on the basis that Victoria is listed as holding the marks 'as parent or guardian' – which stopped being the case once Brooklyn turned 18."

Three Potential Legal Grounds for Action

Dr Luke McDonagh, associate professor of law at the London School of Economics, outlines three potential legal grounds Brooklyn could pursue:

1. Passing Off Claim: "If Victoria uses the mark – his name – in ways that mislead consumers into believing Brooklyn endorses products he has no connection to, he could pursue a passing off claim similar to Rihanna's successful action against Topshop in 2015 when her image was used without permission," Dr McDonagh explained. "The UK has no standalone personality rights, so protecting one's name depends on either trade mark registration or proving misrepresentation through passing off."
2. Bad Faith Challenge: "The trade mark was filed by Victoria as Brooklyn's guardian – when he was a minor. While there is no UK case law directly addressing parent/guardian bad faith challenges, Brooklyn could argue by analogy that the registration was made not for legitimate trade mark purposes but to control his commercial identity," he said. "The challenge would be whether this guardianship relationship, combined with lack of genuine commercial use by Victoria, demonstrates the kind of improper purpose that constitutes bad faith under the law."
3. Personal Name Rights: Despite the trademark registration, Brooklyn retains rights under the Trade Marks Act to use his own name in business, provided he does so honestly. "The law recognises that individuals should not be entirely prevented from using their own names commercially," Dr McDonagh noted. "However, 'honest practices' means he cannot use it to deliberately create confusion or free ride on any goodwill Victoria may have built in the trade mark."

The complexity arises because Victoria registered the trademark as his guardian while also being listed as proprietor herself. This creates a situation where Brooklyn may need to navigate using his own birth name in his commercial practices while respecting her registered trademark rights.