The legal dispute between Australian music icon, Kylie Minogue and American reality television star, Kylie Jenner represents one of the most high-profile trademark battles in entertainment history.
Beginning in 2014 and reaching a resolution in 2017, this case highlights the complexities of personal name protection in global commerce and the intersection of celebrity status with intellectual property rights.
The conflict began with Jenner’s attempt to trademark the name “Kylie” for her fashion and beauty lines. This was successfully opposed by Minogue, who had built her brand around her first name for decades.
Background and Context
Before the trademark dispute erupted, both women had established significant but distinctly different public personas around their shared first name. Kylie Minogue rose to international fame in the late 1980s, transitioning from her role in the Australian soap opera “Neighbours” to becoming one of the world’s most successful pop stars. By the time of the dispute, Minogue had spent decades cultivating her brand simply as “Kylie” across music, entertainment, perfumes, and clothing lines.
On the other hand, Kylie Jenner gained recognition through the reality television show “Keeping Up With the Kardashians” before developing her own substantial following and subsequent business ventures. As the youngest member of the Kardashian-Jenner family, she was preparing to launch what would eventually become her billion-dollar cosmetics empire. This expansion necessitated securing trademark protection for her name, setting the stage for conflict with the already-established Kylie brand belonging to Minogue.
The rarity of the name “Kylie” played a significant role in this case. As Minogue later noted in a 2022 interview: “When I was named Kylie, I think I met one person older than me called Kylie. So it’s kind of unusual”. This uncommonness contributed to both women building distinctive personal brands around their first names, eventually bringing them into direct legal conflict despite operating in somewhat different industries and markets.
The Legal Battle Unfolds: Timeline and Key Developments
The conflict began in April 2014, when Jenner attempted to register the trademark “KYLIE” with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for “advertising services” and “endorsement services” in anticipation of her expanding business ventures. This move prompted swift action from Minogue’s business entity, KDB Pty Ltd.
In February 2016, Minogue’s legal team formally filed their opposition to Jenner’s trademark application, noting that Minogue had been selling products under the “KYLIE” brand long before Jenner. They also stated that customers buying Jenner’s products under that name “would likely be confused, be mistaken, or be deceived” into believing they were buying something from Minogue.
This filing marked the beginning of an elongated legal tussle that would eventually encompass multiple trademark applications. In the months that followed, Minogue’s team also opposed Jenner’s applications for “Kylie” for “entertainment services, namely, personal appearances by a celebrity, actress and model” (June 2016) and for “Kylie Cosmetics” (October 2016).
Throughout 2016, the case was suspended at least twice for settlement negotiations, indicating that both parties were exploring the possibility of resolving the dispute outside of formal legal proceedings. By January 2017, Minogue’s team withdrew the application, which raised “the possibility that they agreed to a settlement”.
The litigation was particularly complex because it involved multiple applications and different aspects of both celebrities’ business interests.
Arguments and Legal Strategies in the Trademark Dispute
Minogue’s opposition to Jenner’s trademark applications rested on several key arguments that illustrate common principles in trademark disputes. Her legal team emphasised that she already owned Kylie-related trademarks in the United States across several industries and had established the website http://www.kylie.com, which had been operational since August 1996—a year before Jenner was born.
In their filings, Minogue’s lawyers described her as an “internationally renowned performing artist, humanitarian and breast cancer activist known worldwide simply as ‘Kylie’”. This characterisation aimed to establish the longstanding association between the name “Kylie” and Minogue in the public consciousness, a crucial factor in trademark disputes where brand recognition is central to the concept of potential consumer confusion.
In contrast, Jenner was characterised by Minogue’s legal team as a “secondary reality television personality” who had drawn criticism for her “photographic exhibitionism and controversial posts” on social media. This unflattering portrayal was designed to minimise Jenner’s claim to the name in comparison to Minogue’s established reputation, particularly given that Minogue had been selling products under the “Kylie” name for decades.
The core legal issue centred around potential consumer confusion—whether allowing Jenner to trademark “Kylie” would lead consumers to believe her products were associated with or endorsed by Minogue. Minogue’s team argued that her prior use and established reputation created superior rights to the name in commercial contexts.
Resolution and Aftermath
The dispute reached a significant turning point on January 19th, 2017, when Minogue’s team withdrew its opposition to Jenner’s trademark application. This withdrawal suggested that the parties had likely reached some form of settlement agreement, though the specific terms were not made public.
Shortly thereafter, on February 5th, 2017, the USPTO rejected Jenner’s trademark application. This outcome represented a victory for Minogue’s position, effectively preventing Jenner from securing exclusive rights to the name “Kylie” for her business ventures at that time.
Following the resolution of the dispute, both Kylies moved forward with their business plans, adapting to the legal reality established by the case. Jenner proceeded to launch her beauty line under the name “Kylie Cosmetics” rather than simply “Kylie,” a modification that allowed her to build her brand while respecting the legal boundaries established through the dispute.
In what some observers viewed as a response to the conflict, Minogue launched her own makeup brand in 2019, which she named simply “Kylie”. This move could be interpreted as Minogue asserting her established rights to use the name in the beauty industry following her successful opposition to Jenner’s trademark applications.
Lessons Learnt
This trademark dispute highlights the importance and complexities of brand protection, particularly when it involves personal names and global commerce.
At Norebase, we understand that a brand isn’t just a name, it’s a critical asset that deserves protection, especially when expanding globally. Similar to how Minogue’s early establishment of trademarks across multiple jurisdictions strengthened her legal position, Norebase helps businesses strategically protect their brands through proactive global trademark registrations in key markets across the world, including the United States, the UK, and beyond.
Here’s what we learnt:
- Early Protection is a Game Changer: Kylie Minogue’s prior registrations and early establishment of the website Kylie.com became vital evidence of her superior claim to the name. Similarly, Norebase advises companies to secure their intellectual property proactively, preventing future conflicts.
- Comprehensive Strategy: Trademark conflicts often involve nuanced strategy across multiple jurisdictions and industries. Norebase specialises in advising businesses on strategic trademark filings, trademark watch services, opposition filings, and navigating complex settlement negotiations.
- Local and Global Expertise: As this case highlighted, international trademarks involve understanding local laws and global implications. With deep expertise in global trademark law, including complex markets in Africa, the US, the UK, Europe, and the Caribbean—Norebase helps businesses secure, manage, and defend their brands globally.
Ultimately, as “The Battle of the Kylies” shows, failing to adequately protect your brand early can result in costly legal battles or forced rebranding. Norebase ensures that your brand’s intellectual property is secure, thus minimising risk and maximising your potential to thrive in the global market.
Contact us via email at operations@norebase.com or visit https://norebase.com/expansion so we can assist you with brand and IP protection.
