Meghan and Harry’s Trademark Application for Podcast Name Rejected, Facing Legal Consequences

Meghan and Harry face yet another setback as their trademark application for their podcast name has been rejected by US officials.

This news comes just a week after the couple’s $20 million Spotify deal was canceled.

The rejection was based on the likelihood of confusion with an existing brand, and the couple’s lawyer has requested an extension to refine their application.

The trademark application, seeking exclusive rights to the name “archetypes,” was refused by the US Patent and Trademark Office.

The Arizonian firm Archetypes LLC had already obtained exclusive use of the name in 2015 for a range of books and articles related to nutrition, fitness, and psychological self-improvement.

Megan and Harry’s application aimed to secure the name for their podcast, specifically focusing on the cultural treatment and stereotyping of women.

Furthermore, records show that both Meghan and Harry failed to sign their own application, raising questions about their attention to detail.

If Meghan’s agency fails to prove that the archetypes are indeed Megan’s, they may face legal action.

To establish a claim of trademark infringement, the plaintiff must demonstrate the validity of the mark and the defendant’s unauthorized use of a similar mark in commerce.

In the case of copyright infringement, compensation can range from $750,000 to $30,000 for each act of infringement, with intentional acts potentially resulting in compensation of up to $150,000.

With Spotify canceling their contract, Megan’s podcast could face legal repercussions, as she is responsible for the content and copyright.

This is not the first time Meghan has encountered trademark-related issues.

Last year, she faced criticism when she applied to reactivate the TIG trademark.

Critics argue that her insistence on patenting a word like “archetypes,” which cannot be exclusively retained as intellectual property, is futile.

Additionally, they question the feasibility of efficiently monetizing it as a personal brand.

The couple’s attempt to make their brand about empowerment and aspiration has been met with ridicule.

Many find it ironic that two individuals born into and married into wealth claim ownership of a word that others have used for their businesses.

In the UK, where royalty still holds significance, Meghan and Harry faced insults.

However, in the US, where meritocracy prevails, they are seen as banal and condescending.

As a result of this trademark rejection and the public’s perception, interest in Meghan and the concept of archetypes has significantly declined.

The universal ridicule aimed at Meghan’s failure to understand the basic meaning of the word has tarnished their reputation.

It seems unlikely that the public will buy into their endeavors, marking a significant setback for the couple.