Canadian rapper Drake is entangled in a legal battle with fashion brand Members Only, which has accused him of trademark infringement related to merchandise sold during his latest tour. According to Billboard, the lawsuit was filed by Members Only’s parent company, JR Apparel World LLC, against Drake’s Away From Home Touring Inc. in a New York federal court on June 12.
The crux of the dispute centers on Drake’s sale of merchandise featuring the phrase “Members Only.” This phrase also titles a song on his 2023 album, For All the Dogs. Despite the song’s presence, JR Apparel World LLC argues that this does not grant Drake the right to use their trademark on apparel, leading to potential consumer confusion.
In the lawsuit, Members Only claims that the merchandise sold at Drake’s It’s All a Blur Tour and online are infringing on their established trademark. The company contends that the similarity between their products and Drake’s merchandise could mislead consumers regarding the origin of the items. “Away From Home’s use of ‘Members Only’ … is likely to cause confusion, mistake, and deception among consumers as to the origin of Away From Home’s infringing T-shirts,” the lawsuit asserts.
The legal document highlights that Members Only has been a recognized name in the fashion industry for decades, primarily known for their iconic racer jackets popular in the 1980s. The company claims that Drake’s use of the phrase on his tour merchandise could tarnish their brand’s reputation and capitalize unfairly on their established name.
While the lawsuit acknowledges that the song “Members Only” on Drake’s album doesn’t directly cause trademark issues, the sale of clothing bearing the same phrase does, given Members Only’s long history of selling apparel with this trademark. The company’s attorneys emphasize that Drake’s merchandise includes goods “identical, overlapping, and/or highly similar” to those sold by Members Only.
Drake, who has successfully navigated other legal challenges recently, now faces significant implications if the court rules in favor of Members Only. This lawsuit adds to his list of legal entanglements, including those from the Astroworld disaster and a promotional fake Vogue cover for his album Her Loss
Members Only’s action seeks to protect their trademark and prevent any dilution or confusion in the marketplace. They argue that Drake’s merchandise exploits their brand’s recognition and misleads consumers about the products’ true origins.
The outcome of this lawsuit will hinge on interpretations of trademark law and whether Drake’s use of “Members Only” on his merchandise is likely to cause consumer confusion. If Members Only prevails, Drake may be compelled to cease selling the disputed merchandise and potentially pay damages.
This case underscores the complexities of trademark law, especially when it intersects with the entertainment industry, and highlights the importance of clear, distinctive branding in both music and fashion sectors.