Brand Beckham and wealthy family disputes

As family feuds go, Brooklyn Beckham’s Instagram stories setting out his stall on the Beckham family dispute are up there with Prince Harry’s book. There are parallels drawn between them for good reason. Brooklyn has said that for his family brand Beckham comes first, and for the Windsors, it’s the Crown. Behind it all for both is reputation, family legacy, and lucrative contracts.

The Beckhams seem to recognise that they are worth more together than the sum of their parts. That is relatively common with famous families – the Royal family is an obvious comparison, with the Gallagher brothers together as Oasis being another good example. When families become brands, disputes can really impact their business and their income, beyond the emotional turmoil that they can wreak on the family itself.

The reputation management challenges arising from a dispute like this are certainly one legal problem to consider and you’d expect that Brooklyn’s statements were checked and verified before they were posted to manage the defamation risk. Notably, however, among the allegations about Brooklyn’s parents was that they “attempted to bribe [him] into signing away the rights to [his] name” when he got married.

For most of us, this wouldn’t be an issue if we fell out with our families because we don’t all have our names legally protected. So why is it an issue for the Beckhams?

Brooklyn’s allegation could be because the Beckhams have their names trademarked. There are lots of reasons why a celebrity might want to trademark their name and the names of their children, particularly if those children want to use the family name to make money in future.

Beckham family trademarks

Beckham is one of the best-known names in the world and there is huge brand value in it for the family. With that name comes an open door for the most lucrative endorsement deals on offer. David Beckham was famously one of the first British footballers to engage in brand deals.

Now, the brand goes far beyond football. If, like the Beckhams, you’re running a business empire that spans fashion, lifestyle, beauty, music, sports, and you secure sponsorships and endorsements beyond that, it’s astute to make sure that the family name, which is your greatest asset, is protected.

Victoria Beckham, as Brooklyn’s parent and guardian, filed a trademark for the words ‘Brooklyn Beckham’ in 2016 in a range of classes which cover toys, beauty, media, and leather products. According to the UKIPO, she still owns the marks. There were similar marks for the Beckhams’ other children filed around the same time, all owned by Victoria Beckham as their parent and guardian. It’s not clear whether these were assigned to the children, but the trademarks expire at the end of this year. It’ll be interesting to see whether they’re renewed and, if so, whether any are omitted from the renewal process.

The Beckhams might’ve wanted Brooklyn to assign (or ‘sign over’) trademarks he owns containing ‘Beckham’ to them because he’d no longer be using that name when he married (Brooklyn and his wife Nicola use the surname ‘Peltz-Beckham’). If he did so, the immediate family would keep exclusive use of the surname for brand deals.

Their request could also be intended to manage the risk of brand dilution because Brooklyn has kept Beckham as part of his name, or because the Beckhams recognised there was a dispute brewing and they wanted to maintain control of the family name.

Family disputes

What happens to trademarks in a dispute is tied to the potential impact on the strength and value of the brand. In a family business context, if someone leaves, you lose control of their activity and they might want to use the family name for whatever they do next.

If they do that, it could cause confusion, they could use it in a way that dilutes your brand, or they could use it in a way that wouldn’t otherwise have been ‘on brand’ for your family business, all of which are a risk to your business going forward. These risks can usually be managed in a Settlement Agreement if there’s a formal structure in place, but that’s not always the case, especially if your relationship is familial first and foremost.

The Beckhams’ dispute also neatly illustrates how many private wealth disputes arise. What often starts as a private falling out can quickly escalate to a legal dispute once reputation, brand, and significant income streams are involved.

Blurred lines between personal and business interests, different expectations, changes in family dynamics, and lack of communication are all themes we see in family and private wealth disputes, which can become all the more difficult to resolve once trust has broken down.

And once one party has taken to social media, it becomes more than just a family or even a legal dispute – it becomes a matter of public interest, and each headline can make the prospect of a resolution seem less likely.

Dispute management

The brand Beckham dispute involves issues that all brands have to manage, whether it’s a family business or otherwise.

Introducing new people comes with the risk that they aren’t quite the right fit with your team, that they don’t align with your brand’s values, or that they engage in conduct you don’t agree with, which can be more problematic if they do so publicly. All of these issues should be closely managed from the outset, to reduce the risk of having to call in damage control later.

More widely, if you do find yourself in the thick of a dispute involving the family business (or brand), taking advice at an early stage about all the options, legal and strategic, is key. It might not just save the brand; it might also save your family relationships from long-term damage.

The Commercial and Private Wealth disputes teams at Shepherd and Wedderburn advise clients on high-profile dispute resolution, including specialist expertise in family business and private wealth disputes and reputation management.

If you would like to discuss anything covered in this article, please get in touch with a member of our Dispute Resolution team.

Contributors: