It seems like every several years, Yoko Ono comes out of the woodwork to remind the world she was married to John Lennon, and she wants some respect for it. Today, Know More Media's business bloggers are buzzing about a lawsuit Yoko Ono filed last week with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. 
In her petition, Yoko Ono wants to stop a musician from Tennessee, Lennon Murphy, from continuing to use the trademark of the name "Lennon" which Lennon Murphy filed back in 2003 as the name of her band.
Lennon Murphy is saying that back in 2000 when her band first signed with Arista Records, she sent her product manager, Justin Shukat (interestingly, the son of Yoko Ono's current attorney, Peter Shukat) to discuss the name issue with Yoko Ono in order to ensure there wouldn't be any problems with the release of the band's first record that year. Lennon Murphy is saying that Yoko Ono gave her approval at the time.
With that approval, Lennon Murphy and her band released their album and a few years later, Lennon Murphy trademarked the name. Now, in 2008, two days before the statute of limitations on the trademark ran out, Yoko Ono filed her petition trying to stop Lennon Murphy from using the Lennon name she had trademarked.
To add to the controversy, and publicity spectacle, Julian Lennon (John Lennon's son from his first marriage to Cynthia Lennon) has stated that he supports Lennon Murphy. It's no secret that he and Yoko Ono have been at odds publicly before.
What makes this story so interesting from a marketing perspective (aside from the publicity side of it)? All of this back and forth he-said, she-said is happening on MySpace. Social networking is helping to spread this story across the internet like wildfire.
What do you think?
A Yoko Ono rep stopped by my Newsvine column today and left a comment stating that Ms. Ono is not seeking to keep Lennon Murphy from using her name but rather to keep her from owning trademark exclusivity to it. Seems reasonable enough to me but I'm sure others will disagree. If what Ono's representative says is true, then Lennon Murphy is the one guilty of publicity stunting, should stop playing the sympathy card and defend her trademark if she believes she has a right to it.
Posted by: Kimberlee Morrison | February 14, 2008 5:22 PM | Permalink to Comment