Dear Simon



Rhythmix and the X Factor



On 23 September 2011 Simco (a company largely owned by you) lodged an application in Europe to trademark the name "Rhythmix" for use by the programme X Factor. At the time of lodging that application X Factor and Simco were fully aware that "Rhythmix" was an existing trademarked name of a music charity that works with vulnerable young people.



Rather than seeking any discussion with the Charity, considering any of the moral implications of their actions, or checking with the Charity whether the pursuit of an exclusive trademark might have a negative impact on the activities of the Charity, Simco and their legal representatives apparently sought a way to use the law to circumvent the trademark of the Charity.



We don't buy this media invention of you as Mr Nasty. Your wikipedia entry explains at length your involvement with children's charities, and we commend you for it. But equally we don't believe that you are unaware of the way your own company is acting. Or maybe your staff are trying to "manage" it for you?



By pursuing these trademarks Simco is forcing the Charity to take legal action to ensure it can continue to exist and offer opportunities to young people to create and perform their own music. Maybe those young people won't be on your programmes, or your record label, but the music they create is important to them.



Rhythmix the charity has worked with over 40,000 young people in the last twelve years. All of that work is placed at risk by the actions of your company. Every legal action the Charity has to take to protect itself from Simco is a project that won't happen. A project that could make a difference to a vulnerable young person. A large number of the public reading this will see it for exactly what it is; a ridiculously overblown storm in a tiny teacup. Simco are solely responsible for that situation and you can resolve it in a matter of seconds.



For that reason, Simon, we are personally asking you to sort this problem out in the quickest and simplest way:



Just change the name.



Thank you.



Mark Davyd

Chief Executive

Rhythmix

www.facebook.com/RhythmixMusicCharity

FIght Fight Fight!!!!

I think it wrong that Simon and Co are doing this they could have easily change the Girlsbands name in September when this was brough to light. But now a Charity is going to have to use their resources to fight a legal case instead of using their resources for good.

I don't understand how can x factor trademark a name which is already trademarked, surely they can't override that?

From what I understand the charity trademarked it for educational purposes only, and Simco have trademarked it for entertainment ones.

That's not "circumventing" the law. The charity didn't protect the name fully so they can hardly complain that someone else is using it. It's not Cowell's fault that the charity are spending money on this, it's their own fault for not having protected it properly in the first place.

The charity are just looking for publicity and that's what they're paying for. Adverts are expensive. I don't feel sorry for them and I don't see how X Factor's Rythmix are going to harm their charitable actions in any way.

I don't understand how can x factor trademark a name which is already trademarked, surely they can't override that?


They cant. The fact is the Charity hasnt trademarked its name in the relevant areas. Simco are doing nothing wrong.

There is no way, anyone with any sense will confuse Rhythmix the 4 piece girl band with the Charity in question. There is no conflict and IMO the Charity has chosen its path purly from an exposure POV.

No conflict what planet are you on, this is a music charity that do put on concerts and put out CDs. And if the Girls were to do the same there would be a very big conflict.

Got it!! Just stick a U at the beginning of their name. Sorted. No confusion with any EXISTING band

Legally Syco may well have done nothing wrong, I get that. Morally however it stinks. Syco didn't trademark the name until September 23rd - you can be damn sure they settled on the group name long before they had a group, and therefore had time to revise it, if only out of RESPECT (a key word here) for the charity and its aims.

There's more to life - and business - than observing the law.

The trademark the charity has covers recording, performing and distributing music.

So there is a big conflict.

The problem is also that Simco is now trying to stop the charity from using the name in conjunction with certain events etc that it organises, so it's having a massive impact on them.

As for people not feeling sorry for the charity, they protected the name as much as they could afford. Maybe they received bad advice, but I'm sure that when they protected the name as much as they felt they needed to - at lower cost ensuring only a minimal amount of their resources were being used - that Simon Cowell would come along and start trying to stop them using the name,

Rhythmix have been around for 12 years. They have established themselves as a charity and built their reputation on that name. Forcing them to change it will cost money they don't want to have to use on stupid things like rebranding. They want to use their money for the good of vulnerable children,

Rythmix the band have been together for 2 minutes, haven't released anything at all, and have only been on 3 live shows for heavens sake!!!!

Legally maybe no wrong doing, but morally, ethically and in every other possible way, Simco need to suck it up and change the bands name - even if that's only to the extent of adding The to the beginning of their name!!

Nail.Head. Hit.

Then Simco won't get the trademark.

All seems to be a big fuss over nothing at the moment, applying for a trademark is one thing, being granted it is quite another

This makes sense, I was abit confused over the whole situation!

they have already haven't they?

It not alot of fuss over nothing Simco are trying to stop the charity from trading by aggressively seeking to limit the use of the name by the Charity by lodging applications to grant Simco the exclusive right to record, create promotional items and even use the word in printed media.

Its all here in the link
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showt...light=rhythmix

So therefore the Chraity is at a stand still when they could be making money for vulnerable children.

A trademark applicaiton is not aggresive, it costs £200 or so and can be done online.

And as I posted on that thread, their trademark does cover them for music and such.

What Simco have applied for is, amongst other things "Toys,Games and playthings; Gymnastic and sporting articles not included in other classes; Decorations for Christmas trees"

and "Entertainment and education, all in the nature of television programmes"

Rhythmix have not protected their name in those areas and, from what I can tell, have absolutely no experience in those areas either.

Rhythmix seem to be under the belief that a trademarkl gives them all rights to the name. It does NOT. A trademark is limited to a specific area of industry and Simco's applicaton is in a different area to their charity work, else it'll be rejected.

This would have my support, but I recommend they distance themselves (if they have not done so already) from the Facebook campaign to make Nirvana christmas number 1. They wont help their cause any unless they keep it amiable. The Nirvana campaign might be an entertaining diversion for the fans, but will alienate those in a position to actually assist the copyright issue in a professional and practical way.

Luckily there are precedents before where the original name owner has won.

WWF is (and always was) the name of the biggest Wildlife charity, until a certain Wresting outfit decided they wanted to use the initials. Even after an agreement was hammered out the wrestling mob still kept using the WWF moniker past the expiry date, meaning the wildlife charity had to spend money it didnt have getting the wresting mob to switch to WWE.

Victoria Beckham fought with Peterborough United over the name "The Posh" which the club has used since the 1920's.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...ed/2404115.stm
I recall Barry Fry (Peterborough's owner at the time) saying that she could have probably bought the club for less than she paid out in legal fees for the trademark (and website).

Mind you - wonder who will own the name when there are no original members of the girlband left in it ??

The family of PG Wodehouse never got a penny from the search engine "Ask Jeeves" using the character, because when Wodehouse created the Jeeves in 1915, he somehow failed to include the Internet on his copyrights.
Maybe a music charity would think that no-one from the Music Industry would try to steal their name from them ??

Just read the letter via Twitter, and it's Simon who should change the name, and not be a cuckoo in someone else's nest!

Other angle to it, is how convenient the Charity name and what it does for others, would be to the Simon group, who would just walk in, take name over, not caring how it would affect the Charity.

Shame on you Simon!

Shame on Simon and Co they tried to do this with an up and coming DJ with Leona song. And now they are doing the same thing to a charity.

Seams Like Simon and Co think they can just step on the little guy.

It's ok, the X Factor or Syco will have no need for the name anymore in a few weeks.

Yep.

But I bet X Factor Rythmix will still be more famous and recognisable than this obscure charity!

"big fuss over nothing".....a fuss should be made as Simon wants the whole thing! A name like that has already been established! Doesn't take much to work out why he chose that name!

The little guy/guys have to stand up and fight. I took on a huge business enterprise and won!