Victoria Beckham's Trademark Control Over Brooklyn's Birth Name
In a revelation that has sparked considerable public discussion, it has emerged that former Spice Girl and fashion designer Victoria Beckham trademarked the birth name of her eldest son, Brooklyn Peltz Beckham, back in 2017. This legal move has taken on new significance following recent allegations made by Brooklyn about his parents prioritising their brand over family matters.
The 2017 Trademark Registration
According to official records from the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), Victoria Beckham registered the birth names of all four of her children—Brooklyn, Romeo, Cruz, and Harper Beckham—as trademarks in 2017. The registrations cover an extensive range of goods and services, including cosmetics, books, clothing, and toys. This means that if any of the Beckham children wish to use their own names commercially within these categories, they must first seek permission from their mother, who currently holds the exclusive rights.
The trademark registration is scheduled for renewal in December 2026, potentially offering Brooklyn an opportunity to reclaim the rights to his name should Victoria Beckham choose not to renew the registration at that time.
Growing Trend of Name Trademarks
Alex Taylor, a partner in the Intellectual Property, Commercial and Technology team at the law firm Withers, notes that trademarking personal names has become increasingly common in recent years, particularly among celebrities, sports stars, and public figures.
"It's becoming even more common now, especially in the last few years, where you have people, celebrities, sports stars, athletes," Taylor explained. "Once you have your name registered as a mark, it gives far more control over your brand."
Potential Pathways for Brooklyn to Reclaim Rights
Legal experts suggest several possible avenues through which Brooklyn might seek to regain control over the commercial use of his birth name. Taylor suggests the most straightforward approach would involve negotiation between mother and son.
"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," Taylor said. "That, I think, is the most simple way of doing it. 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, Taylor cautioned that if genuine animosity exists between the parties, and if David and Victoria Beckham see significant commercial value in maintaining control of the name, the process could become considerably more difficult and expensive through litigation.
Legal Challenges and Hearings
Should Brooklyn formally request the rights to his name and face objection from his mother, the matter could proceed to a formal hearing. Nick Aries, intellectual property partner at Bird & Bird, suggests this wouldn't necessarily represent the "end of the line" for Brooklyn's aspirations.
"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."
Potential Legal Grounds for Action
Dr Luke McDonagh, associate professor of law at the London School of Economics, outlines three potential legal grounds Brooklyn might explore if considering action against his mother.
First, Brooklyn could pursue a passing off claim if his mother used his name to endorse products with which he has no genuine connection. "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."
Second, Brooklyn could present a challenge based on bad faith. "The trade mark was filed by Victoria as Brooklyn's guardian—when he was a minor," Dr McDonagh noted. "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. 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."
Third, despite the trademark registration being under Lady Beckham's name, Brooklyn retains certain 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 stated. "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 here is that Victoria registered as his guardian and as the proprietor herself—so technically Brooklyn may need to navigate using his own birth name in his own honest commercial practices while respecting her registered trade mark rights."
This situation highlights the complex intersection of family relationships, celebrity branding, and intellectual property law, creating a fascinating case study in how personal names can become valuable commercial assets subject to legal control and potential dispute.
