Lady Antebellum changes name to Lady A, now suing a black singer who goes by Lady A

[Takket]

Link to tweet

?s=20

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/band-lady-a-files-lawsuit-singer-anita-lady-a-white-1302517?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

so here is where we are a...... Lany Antebellum sees the BLM movement and says, hmmm, maybe we should ditch the Antebellum. Might be seen as racist/hurtful. So let's go with Lady A.

Oh hey........ someone is already using that name. A black woman named Anita White. So let's SUE HER. Because the best way to show we really care about being seen as racist, is to go out and use our white privilege to try and hurt an actual black person.........

They basically want to share the trademarked name she is already using, she told them no, so they sue. PICK A DIFFERENT NAME

[handmade34]

1. ...

[MLAA]

2. Pure racist assholery. What tone deaf ignorance.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

3. I thought I'd read that the group had come to some sort of

agreement with the singer already using Lady A.

[Fozzledick]

4. I think "Lady A-hole" is available.

Just a thought

[volstork]

10. Thank you.

Made me LOL!

[2naSalit]

18. Yes, I think it is available and it seems to be

just her style.

[Squidly]

5. I always saw their name as racist

If anyone knows what Antebellum stood for they could see this too. I always shook my head at why they chose that name...but to sue someone who was ALREADY using what they changed to is beyond stupid.

[misanthrope]

7. Same here

The first time I saw their name, years back, my first thought was, "What, Dame Jim Crow was already taken?"

[Coventina]

32. Me three. I was shocked that a country act would be that blatant.

[TheBlackAdder]

6. Sort of like when Richard Branston started suing the shit out of every company with Virgin in it.

.

Most of the companies were smaller businesses and folded or changed their names because they could not afford a protracted legal battle, even though they had their names for years before Branston started to acquire Virgin Records and Virgin Atlantic and other firms.

.

[Blue_true]

13. If those companies had trademarked the name, they could have counter-sued and

forced Branson to pay damages and legal expenses. The trademark, if done correctly and worldwide, would give them exclusive rights to the name, regardless of what was in it (as long as it was not vulgar - but in that case, they would not have gotten a trademark).

[coti]

8. They also ripped off Alan Parsons Project to make a name for themselves.

[Squidly]

12. This happens more often than one would think

Coldplay did the same thing with a Joe Satriani tune...almost note for note.

[2naSalit]

19. Okay, so they added

a cat walking on a piano and that was it? I hate it when musicians do that and then act like assholes when they get caught.

[Orangepeel]

9. tone deaf assholes

"When we learned that Ms. White had also been performing under the name Lady A, we had heartfelt discussions with her about how we can all come together and make something special and beautiful out of this moment," said the group in a statement."

Why should she have to share her name to "make something special". Jesus.

[Lancero]

27. The reasons for using the name make it even worse.

Anita Whites usage? Shorthand for her own name. Lady Antebellums usage? Shorthand for a word with significant racial connotations.

[ProfessorGAC]

31. Did They Offer Her Enough $?

Or was the discussion about how cool she would be to turn over the TM.
They've made tons of money.
Offer her a sizeable sum, connect her with their management, help promote her, and then see if she says yes.
My guess is they didn't offer enough to make it worth it to Anita.
A small payment for the trademark is not likely enough to take the risk of losing public recognition.
If I'm right, I don't blame her for saying no.

[Beakybird]

11. The country band got the trademark first like eight years ago.

I see nothing wrong. The country band doesn't want to take away the blues singer's ability to use Lady A even though they probably legally could. The country band PAID for the trademark that the other singer had years to obtain if she thought it was so important. If it was a white polka singer, everyone would ignore this. I don't think being black gives the blues singer extra legal rights.

[Blue_true]

15. Yes, if they were first through the gates on the Trademark, then they have the rights,

as long as they renew the Trademark on schedule.

[a kennedy]

16. So sad........how do we overcome this......

perfect example of, black vs white.....with a twist to be sure. BUT..... who is in authority to decide it.

[Beakybird]

17. Being a professional act means getting a trademark for your name!

The blues singer had years to get Lady A. She apparently never bothered. The country band has been called Lady A by their fans for years, and they owned the trademark since 2012 according to reports.
I think it's ok to put out the case that it's unfair to use that name because I had it first. But to accuse the country band of having their knee on her neck?? THAT is being an asshole. I'm mad about this because that trivializes what happened to George Floyd and others.
I say let the courts settle it. And remember, the country band wants to share the name. The blues singer wants exclusive use of the name.

[miyazaki]

20. Couldn't they just call themselves "Aunt Bell"?

-Godamn ripoff artists.

[Beakybird]

21. Are you kidding? Aunt Bell.

You have the right to call them rip-off artists. I think that's unfair. They didn't steal the name. They had fans calling them Lady A, and they legally obtained a trademark. The country band is saying, we want to shed the racist name, our fans call us Lady A, and even though we own the trademark and can stop the blues singer from using the same name, we want to share. I think that's reasonable.
I don't think this is a racial matter, and I think that those vilifying the country band might be guilty of reverse racism, because if it was some white bluegrass singer calling himself Snoop Dogg in Podunk, Idaho since 1975 trying to get Snoop Dogg to change his name even though the white dude never got a Trademark, the people here on DU would tell him to go to hell.

[JonLP24]

23. Reverse racism?

I prefer they keep the old name instead of trying to sue a black artist who already has the name.

[Iggo]

24. Reverse racism.

[Tipperary]

22. How are they ripoff artists?

They haVe a trademark on the name.

[obamanut2012]

25. They have owned the trademark to Lady A for almost a decade

They didn't rip anything off. Neither did Anita White, but it isn't her trademark.

[coti]

29. They'd been going by Lady Antebellum until they figured out

it was racist, though. And they did rip off Alan Parsons.

[Lancero]

26. For those shouting 'but the trademark!', first to use tends to take precedence...

Over first to register.

While it is true that this band filed the trademark back in 2012, by their own admission they are just now switching to the name for commerical purposes. That fans called the band Lady A as a nickname is irrelevant.

Meanwhile, we have Anita White, who has been using Lady A for the past two decades (Hey, that also means her use predates the bands formation)... And most importantly, that name has been used by her commercially in performances and with album releases (The first album of which was in 2010, which again predates the bands trademark registration).

The trademark never should have been granted in the first place. Legally, they don't have much if any ground to stand on. The public optics, however, are far worse - Anita Whites usage of the name? Shorthand for her first name. Lady Antebellums usage? Shorthand for Antebellum, a word with significant racial connotations.

[JonLP24]

28. I agree

Thanks for posting.

[drmeow]

30. Thanks

I thought that was how it worked but didn't have enough knowledge to be sure.