Starship Entertainment, the agency behind girl group IVE, has come under scrutiny over a trademark dispute with a small leather workshop called “Ive Leather Goods.”
On September 30, the workshop publicly shared a notice of trademark cancellation filed by Starship, sparking outrage. The owner explained:
- The “Ive Leather Goods” trademark was registered in 2019 for four product categories.
- The group IVE only debuted in 2021, meaning the workshop’s brand existed beforehand.
- The name “Ive” was derived from his English name, which he had used across social media since before IVE’s debut.
The owner expressed frustration: “I registered my business in 2015 and trademarked it in 2019. There are records of collaborations and exhibitions with public institutions. I cannot understand why a cancellation case was filed.”
He added that the brand was built on his parents’ legacy, stressing: “Even if operations pause, I must protect it. If this can happen to me, it could happen to anyone else with a similar name. For the public good, I will continue to share updates.”
Critics accused Starship of pressuring a small business despite the different industries involved, framing the dispute as a “power play” that relied on IVE’s global reputation.
On October 2, Starship released an official statement clarifying that the filing was not authorized by the company: “The IVE trademark case was independently pursued by a legal representative without consultation. Once we became aware, we reviewed the process and immediately withdrew it.”
The agency expressed regret: “We deeply apologize for the confusion. While protecting our artists’ rights is important, we also respect the efforts of those who have faithfully run their businesses for many years. We will strengthen our internal management system to prevent recurrence and avoid unnecessary misunderstandings with artists and fans.”
Although Starship acted quickly to withdraw the case, the incident has sparked wider discussions about:
- How entertainment companies handle intellectual property.
- The balance between protecting K-pop trademarks and respecting the rights of small business owners.
Whether large agencies may unintentionally (or intentionally) overstep boundaries in protecting their artists’ brands.
For now, the immediate legal conflict has ended, but the case has highlighted the sensitive intersection of global K-pop branding and local businesses, raising questions about how such disputes should be managed in the future.
]
Sources: EDaily,TVReport
You must be logged in to post a comment.