A recent court dispute involving jewellery designer Aurélie Bidermann and fashion retailer Massimo Dutti has sparked important discussion about trademarks, personal names and creative rights. The case reveals significant hazards for designers who sign away rights to their own name in business deals.

🔎 What Exactly Happened

• After Bidermann’s company went into judicial reorganisation, a firm called AMS Design acquired its intangible assets — including trademarks.
• As part of the deal, Bidermann also assigned patrimonial rights to her family name. That meant her ability to use her own name commercially was severely restricted.
• Later, Bidermann collaborated with Massimo Dutti on a capsule collection. The products bore labels reading “by Mademoiselle Aurélie Bidermann,” suggesting her name was used as a brand identifier.
• AMS Design challenged this use, arguing that the name was being exploited as a trademark — not just as a designer credit. A court agreed. It ruled that this was a commercial use of the name, not a simple author’s signature.

In effect, although Bidermann retained moral rights as author, the ruling severely limits her ability to use her own name for future commercial ventures. Experts say this outcome could cripple a designer’s career if they rely on name recognition.

⚠️ Why This Case Matters — Risks for Creatives

Legal experts warn this case sets a worrying precedent:

• Assigning a personal or family name along with trademark assets can lock a designer out of using their own name professionally.
• In extreme cases, it can strip a creator of their identity and brand — essentially making their own name untouchable in commerce.
• Even “signature” or “by-credit” collaborations may be reinterpreted as full trademark use — leaving former owners vulnerable.

According to one interviewed lawyer:

“I would not recommend assigning one’s family name under contract. A trademark assignment is one thing — but giving away your name irreversibly is excessive.”

📝 What Designers Should Do to Protect Their Identity

For artists and designers negotiating contracts — especially with larger firms — this case offers lessons:

• Avoid signing away rights to your personal or family name.
• If assigning trademark rights, ensure the contract explicitly preserves your right to use your name as a personal signature (not brand identity).
• Consult a legal expert in intellectual property before agreeing to any broad assignment clauses.
• For collaborations, clarify that name use is only for author credit — not as a brand or trademark.

This dispute is a powerful wake-up call. It shows how a single contractual clause can eliminate a designer’s control over their own identity. For creatives everywhere, protecting name rights is as vital as protecting design rights.