What’s in a name? Designer names as trade marks in fashion

When browsing through fashion magazines, or high-end designer districts, it is very common to see names as brands. Louis Vuitton, Yves Saint Laurent, Coco Chanel, Christian Dior, Vivienne Westwood, Karen Walker, Maggie Marrilyn, Caitlin Crisp, the list goes on. Fashion design is a personal endeavour, just like building a business. But what does this mean for the designers that sell the rights in their name?

Designers want their name on their creations, just like inventors want their names on their inventions.

Where a designer uses their name in connection with the clothes they design, over time, that name gains a reputation which is associated with the style and quality of the products: the brand. Other designers can join the team behind the brand as it grows into a business, all still working under the founding designer’s name. That name is now acting as a badge of origin: a trade mark.

A successful brand can outlive its founder. For example, Chanel began with Coco Chanel but has had other creative directors most notably Karl Lagerfield[1] and now Matthieu Blazy. Similarly, Dior began with Christian Dior, and other notable creative directors include Yves Saint Laurent, Raf Simmons, Maria Grazia Chiuri[2] and now Jonathan Anderson[3].

The reputation can attach itself to the trade mark, rather than the individual

That trade mark is now a valuable commercial commodity that can be sold or licensed. The owner of the trade mark has the exclusive right to utilise and commercialise the mark for the goods and services for which it is associated. This is the case whether the trade mark is registered or unregistered.

In the recent Australian case between popstar Katy Perry vs fashion designer Katie Perry, the fashion designer was successful in the fight to use her name for her fashion line[4]. Katie Perry launched and acquired a reputation for her fashion label before the singer became overly well-known or otherwise associated with clothing. The reputation attaches not just to the name but also to the goods or services for which they are associated. The designer’s success was because she had a trade mark, with respect to the relevant goods, for KATIE PERRY, not because she was using her own name.

When a designer sells their business, they sell their brand assets, often including the trade marks. The trade marks are valuable because of the reputation that has amassed over the years, and the goodwill associated with the trade mark. A purchaser is not buying the personal name of the individual behind the business, they are purchasing what that name, that brand, that trade mark, has come to mean to its customers and the industry.

Many designers have sold or transferred their rights to the trade marks, including those that are also their names, and those businesses have continued to be successful. For example:

Bobbi Brown sold her business, including trade mark rights to Estee Lauder in 1995. Years after the founder’s exit, BOBBI BROWN continues to be a successful brand.
Kate Spade sold the rights in her namesake handbag brand in 2006. The Kate Spade brand continues to produce new bags now – despite the designer’s passing.
In 2024, New Zealand fashion designer Kate Sylvester announced that she would be closing her clothing brand, Sylvester. It was later announced that her sons Ike, Tom, and Cosmo Conway would be taking over the brand and carrying it on without their mother’s involvement.
Gianni Versace founded Versace in 1978 and after his death, his sister, Donatella Versace became the head of the brand. In April 2025, the Versace brand was purchased by the Prada group for €1.25 billion. It continues now without a Versace at the creative helm of the brand.

Using a name as a brand can create a legacy which continues on, even without the individual involved. So, what happens to the designers?

After a business has been sold and the assets have been transferred, the new owner has the exclusive right to commercialise the intellectual property. The sale agreement will typically include a restraint of trade, or non-compete, clause that prevents the designer from working in the field for a period of time.

The founder may also be invited to continue working with the purchaser. For example, Bobbi Brown continued to work with the BOBBI BROWN brand until 2016 despite having already sold the rights. Now, Bobbi still uses her personal name, and on channels such as Instagram you will find a line in her profile which states: “Bobbi is no longer affiliated with the Bobbi Brown Cosmetics company”. After her restraint period was over, Bobbi built a new cosmetics company, called Jones Road.

Perfumer, Jo Malone, is another designer that sold their name to Estee Lauder. She sold the brand in 1999 but continued to work with the business until 2006. Jo has since created a new fragrance brand, Jo Loves. Jo Loves has collaborated with fashion retailer, Zara. Together, they created a fragrance which includes the following on the label: ‘A creation by Jo Malone CBE, founder of Jo Loves’.

Estee Lauder is now suing Jo Malone for trade mark infringement

The name, Jo Malone, acquired a reputation as a brand with respect to fragrances. Jo Malone sold her rights to the JO MALONE brand and trade mark to Estee Lauder.

Estee Lauder is now suing Jo Malone (the person) and Zara, for trade mark infringement due to the use of ‘Jo Malone’ on the collaboration fragrance collection.

Some may argue that Jo Malone is simply using her own name. However, Estee Lauder’s position is that the JO MALONE brand is their trade mark which covers fragrances, and their trade mark ownership gives them exclusive rights to use the JO MALONE trade mark with respect to fragrances, and use of the trade mark by anyone other than them is trade mark infringement.

The strength of a brand

The ability to sell a name to someone else as a trade mark, and for a reputation to still continue to grow without the individual involved, shows the power of a trade mark. It also allows for a brand to create a legacy which can continue on long after the individual’s involvement.

Designers must consider various factors when they start using their individual name as a brand. It’s essential to think about how this decision may impact any future exit or sales strategy. Key considerations include: