Jay-Z and Beyoncé Lose Bid to Trademark Daughter’s Name

Jay-Z holds Blue Ivy, his daughter with Beyoncé

(Source: The Guardian)

Jay-Z and Beyoncé have lost a bid to trademark the name of their daughter, Blue Ivy. The musicians’ petition was denied by the US patent and trademark office, permitting an American wedding planner to continue using the name.

“Money doesn’t buy everything,” Veronica Alexander told Rolling Stone. Until recently, Alexander had been in danger of losing the rights to the name of her own business: although Blue Ivy Events was founded in 2009, Jay-Z and Beyoncé were seeking to reserve the phrase “Blue Ivy” as a brand name for their own line of baby products. The couple’s first daughter, Blue Ivy Carter, was born on 7 January 2012.

Alexander responded to Jay-Z and Beyoncé’s trademark claim by submitting her own application. The trademark office has now authorised her to continue using the Blue Ivy name for her events company, while the hip-hop power couple can allegedly use the name for other kinds of businesses. “If this [hadn’t worked], I’d go after both of them,” Alexander said. “There’s no way by way of being a celebrity they should have entitlement [to the name]. Shame on them.”

Alexander recalled being surprised when she learned about the name of the little girl: “Nobody names their daughter Blue Ivy,” she said. But their decision – and the controversy – has been good for her business. Besides, should the couple be unsatisfied, the 32-year-old told the Telegraph there’s an easy solution. “If Beyoncé and Jay-Z want to buy me out,” she said, “I’d welcome that.”

I think the only decent thing to do here is for all of us fans to start fundraising on behalf of this unfortunate couple, as it’s clear another way must be found to help support this poor child.

The Rolling Stones Want You To Pay $1,853.50 For Their “Tongue Pit Package”

(Text and photo: BuzzFeed)

The Rolling Stones are going to play two concerts at the Prudential Center in Newark, New Jersey on December 13th and 15th to celebrate their 50th anniversary as a band. Demand for these tickets is basically off the charts – these two gigs are their only shows in North America this year and they haven’t played on this continent since 2006 – so naturally, the base ticket prices are very, very high.

Here are your options for premium seating:

Ooof! The cheapest seats in the house are $114.80 including service fees, and the next step up from that – well, not so much a step so much as a leap across a very wide economic chasm – is $813.00. And that’s before the tickets start getting scalped on the secondary market!

But hey, they’re The Rolling Stones! This could be your last chance to see them. Don’t you want to cash out your 401k and get in their…Tongue Pit?

Pirate Bay vs The RIAA: It’s Copyright Infringement vs Ginormous Record Industry Greed

RIAA vs. The Pirate Bay

Image

A Bouquet Toss Alternative I Don’t Recommend

Plenty of brides are opting out of the traditional bouquet and garter tosses these days. Others toss a bouquet and dispense with anything having to do with a garter. The most common reason seems to be an unwillingness to embarrass guests who may feel pressured into participating, or horrified by the thought of  someone they may not know pushing a garter up their leg. This isn’t always fun, and sometimes guests’ hesitance to take part makes it difficult for a DJ/emcee to get people out of their seats for it. And let’s face it, some folks question the tastefulness of a groom putting his head up a bride’s gown to pull off undergarments in public.

With that in mind, some wedding planner has managed to find an even more tasteless replacement. The quote below is from the Wedding Wire site:

One of my couples didnt do a toss they played a guessing game the bride was blind folded and she had to choose her new hubby by squeezing his butt…it was hilarious..the bridesmaids and the groomsmen participated (so it wouldnt be weird) she then had to narrow the pick down until she got to whom ever she thought was her grooom…FYI..she did pick her GROOM.;)

I especially like “bridesmaids and the groomsmen participated so it wouldn’t be weird”.

Won’t that look cute in the wedding video you watch with your kids 15 years from now…

And They Deserve a Bigger Dressing Room Too

I know I’d pay to see them…as long as Elmo’s not on the bill.

Image

Songs You May Have Missed #204

gregson

Clive Gregson & Christine Collister: “This is the Deal” (1989)

 

As a duo Gregson and Collister were major figures in British folk rock in the late 80’s/early 90’s, similar to what Richard and Linda Thompson had been about a decade and a half earlier. The connections don’t end there: Gregson was a member of Richard Thompson’s band. And Thompson backed Gregson on occasion as well.

Gregson and Collister shared with the Thompsons a common configuration of a male songwriter and highly regarded guitarist accompanied by a female singer with a much-admired voice. Both couples sang songs of domestic turmoil. In the Thompsons’ case those songs were often autobiographical. In the case of Gregson and Collister, hopefully less so. “This is the Deal” for example is about an abusive relationship.

This acoustic performance really highlights Christine Collister’s husky alto–I love when she brings it on the higher notes.

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries