Charity Rhythmix left with steep legal bills after X Factor battle

News

Charity Rhythmix left with steep legal bills after X Factor battle 8

Governance | Vibeka Mair | 28 Oct 2011

Music charity Rhythmix has said the X Factor has left it with ‘considerable’ legal bills, following a battle with the programme over an X Factor band who tried to trademark the charity’s name.

For the past couple of weeks Rhythmix, a music charity which works with young people, has been locked in a legal wrangle with the makers of X Factor, who had sought to trademark the name 'Rhythmix' for use by a girl-band on the Saturday night entertainment show.

Syco and TalkbackThames, who produce the X Factor, have this week announced that they will no longer use the name 'Rhythmix' for the show’s band.

However, Russ Grooms, east regional co-ordinator for Rhythmix, has told civilsociety.co.uk that the actions of the X Factor have been “really sneaky”:

“They have not contacted us about the decision,” he said. “They simply released a press statement which we saw in the news.”

He said that the charity had been left with “considerable” legal bills after having to engage a lawyer when the X Factor sought to trademark the name 'Rhythmix' in Europe:

“We have a UK trademark for the name under education,” he said, “but a European trademark would have superseded it. It would mean we potentially would have to give up the name or go by terms and conditions that could have been attached to the name.

“We’ve had the name for 12 years so it was not viable to lose our brand. The X Factor fully understood who we were before they went for the trademark. It was really sneaky.”

Grooms said the charity was now in talks to see if the X Factor would pay the legal bills it incurred during the dispute.

He added that he believed that the X Factor took the decision to drop the name following a Facebook campaign and a tweet from Twitter stalwart Stephen Fry in its defence.

Fry had tweeted the open letter which Rhythmix chief executive Mark Davyd had written to X Factor creator Simon Cowell about the matter.

A spin-off campaign page on Facebook called Raging for Rhythmix has also supported the charity’s cause over the past few weeks.

The X Factor team did not respond to enquiries.

Place a comment

Andrew Studd
Russell-Cooke
4 Nov 2011

A trademark and brand is an important charitable asset and trustees are under a duty to seek to protect those assets - albeit taking a proportionate approach. Legal advice in this context need not be expensive though I recognise every pound counts.

The silver lining is of course the enormous amount of publicity it has generated for the charity which I hope they will be able to capitalise on. A partnership as suggested by Gemma would be fantastic.

[Reply]

Gemma
1 Nov 2011

Completely agree with Jeri's view on this and would also suggest that the charity's aims actually fit rather neatly with those of X Factor and it might be nice to see the relationship develop into a partnership. X Factor seems to benefit a few individuals every year in their singing talent whilst making a lot of money and it would be really good to seem them embrace corporate responsibility and help young musicians access all forms of music.

Well done to Rhythmix for bringing this matter, and the good work the charity does, to everyone's attention!

[Reply]

Jeri Appiah
Manager
Mind in Ealing and Hounslow
31 Oct 2011

We do not know what the size of the legal cost is, but there is such a thing as decency. Would the owners of X factor simply allow another entertainment group to use their name for their new programme? I would think not. Could they have the decency to pay off this charity's costs which arose out of their incidental or deliberate attempt to use a name that they should know already existed?.

[Reply]

Peter Munro
Treasurer
Scottish Borders Social Enterprise Chamber
28 Oct 2011

I would like to know what Mr Malley thinks was the correct strategy ?

Should charities not defend trademarks ?

Should charities not have trademarks ?

Should charities register trademarks in all possible jurisdictions ?

Should charities change their name every time someone else wants to trademark their name ?

One wonders why the charity wasn't awarded costs, or whether the charity dared not or didn't have the funds to fight in the courts.

I'm very glad I've never been in this situation.

[Reply]

Mr Neil Malley
30 Oct 2011
Response to [Peter Munro]

Maybe I went over the top with this but I cant understand why large legal fees have to be incurred in this particular matter. Surely, the X-factor didnt want any bad publicicty with regards to a spat with a charity that has been using this name for twelve years? I also think that spending donor's money on legal fees must be an absolute last resort. I do accept that a charity needs to defend a trademark if that mark has real tangible value (much beyond the cost of any action). In terms of the publicity this matter has generated for the charity I dont think £100k would have covered it!

[Reply]

Mr Neil Malley
28 Oct 2011

The Chief Executive should be sacked for spending charitable monies on legal fees over a silly issue like the name Rhythmix. Ridiculous use of charitable funds!

[Reply]

GA
Trustee
29 Oct 2011
Response to [Mr Neil Malley]

I too would like to disagree with Mr Malley.

Embarking on legal advice is not something that charities should ever do lightly but if they hadn't done so they would have had to pay to change the website, headed paper, re-register with Charity Commission, etc

I hope that X-Factor have the decency to pay the legal costs!

[Reply]

Ms Nina Den
28 Oct 2011
Response to [Mr Neil Malley]

I strongly disagree with you Mr Malley. Losing the charity's name to the X-Factor would have resulted in a loss of 12 years worth of branding and goodwill for the charity, among of other things - that's a huge potential loss with both tangible (financial) and intangible consequences for the charity which outweigh the legal fees incurred at this stage.

On the contrary, I think it was prudent to seek legal advice to oppose the X-Factor's trade mark application.

Let's hope the "really sneaky" X-Factor producers see the fairness in reimbursing the charity.

[Reply]

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.