The case reported in the press, centred on a lemon and ginger flavoured craft beer marketed under the playful name ‘John Lemon’.
While the case played out in France, the position in the UK would be largely the same.
In this article, we take a look at what happened and why - and lessons food and drink producers need to heed.
What happened?
The dispute arose when Yoko Ono (in fact the registered owner is The Imagine Peace Recoverable Trust which is a legal entity established by Yoko Ono), acting through rights associated with John Lennon, challenged the use of the name ‘John Lemon’ for a craft beer produced by L’Imprimerie.
The beer’s branding included a caricature referencing the musician, as well as wordplay tied to both the lemon flavour and Beatles-related themes.
The brewery had been selling the product for a number of years before receiving a formal cease-and-desist letter. The letter demanded an immediate halt to use of the name, with the threat of significant financial penalties in the event of non-compliance. As addressed below, the brewer ultimately agreed to cease use of the name but negotiated a sell‑off period for existing stock.
The resolution described, allowing the brewer to sell through existing stock, reflects common commercial practice. From the alleged infringer’s perspective, it reduces immediate financial loss and it avoids costly litigation. While from the rights holder’s perspective it achieves rapid cessation of use and avoids court costs and litigation risk.
However, this approach is not guaranteed. Some brand owners will insist on immediate withdrawal. The size of the alleged infringer, nature of the infringement, and past behaviours can be highly influential in the approach and robustness with which the rights owner will approach it.
Legal position
Trade mark infringement in the UK is primarily governed by the Trade Marks Act 1994, in particular section 10. In simplified terms, infringement may occur where, without consent, a third party uses in the course of trade:
- A sign identical to a registered trade mark for goods or services identical to those for which the mark is registered;
- Use of a similar sign for identical or similar goods, where there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public. This includes the likelihood of association; and / or
- Where a mark has a reputation in the UK, even use on dissimilar goods may infringe if it:
- Takes unfair advantage of the mark’s distinctive character or reputation (free-riding); or
- Causes detriment (e.g. dilution or tarnishment).
In actual fact, ‘John Lemon’ is registered as a trade mark in the class for beer (among other classes). However, even if had not been and consumers were unlikely to believe the product originates from the rights holder, the use may still evoke the famous mark, capitalise on goodwill and risk reputational harm enabling the rights owner to rely on s.10(3) of the Act.
In the John Lemon case, the legal response is consistent with protecting a globally recognised personal brand. It is certainly not the first instance of complaint from the estate of a globally recognised person, the Elvis Presley estate has historically enforced trade marks in the UK and EU against unauthorised commercial uses of the name, including in hospitality and themed products, where the use suggests commercial connection.
High-profile individuals routinely register their names as trade marks (e.g. for merchandising, beverages, fashion). Enforcement actions are often taken against parody merchandise; novelty food and drink products; or unauthorised endorsements.
While not always litigated to judgment, advertising and product names referencing well-known media properties or personalities frequently attract enforcement action where they risk association or unfair advantage.
Trade mark owners are incentivised to enforce their rights consistently. This is because non-enforcement can weaken distinctiveness; tolerating infringement may encourage wider third-party use and reputation-based marks rely heavily on controlled associations.
Seasonal products
Temporary, seasonal, or one-off product names constitute ‘use in the course of trade’. This is because it is a relatively low threshold to meet. If a sign is used on packaging, labels, or advertising; and in connection with the commercial sale of goods, then it will typically meet this requirement.
Duration, scale and intent are irrelevant, so, a short-run seasonal product (for example a summer beer) is still commercial exploitation.
Small businesses are not exempt and a tribute or joke does not negate infringement as the presence of humour or parody does not automatically provide a defence under UK trade mark law. Therefore, a limited-edition or festival-themed product can expose a business to the same legal risks as a permanent product line.
Practical steps
Food and drink producers should adopt basic clearance practices before launching a product name:
1. Conduct trade mark searches
- Search the UKIPO register for identical or similar marks.
- Consider phonetic and conceptual similarities (important for puns).
2. Consider reputation marks
- Even if goods differ, assess whether the name evokes a well-known individual or brand.
3. Avoid direct or indirect references to celebrities
- Especially where the reference forms the primary branding hook.
- Visual elements (caricatures, styling) increase risk.
4. Assess ‘likelihood of association’
- Would consumers mentally connect the product with the celebrity or brand?
5. Take legal advice early
- Clearance advice is often far cheaper than rebranding or litigation.
6. Register your own trade mark
- Protect your chosen name where possible to secure exclusivity.
7. Be cautious with short-term products
- Seasonal or limited editions should go through the same checks as core products.
Key takeaway
The John Lemon dispute underscores a key principle: trade mark law protects not just against confusion, but against unfair exploitation of reputation.
In the UK, even a humorous or temporary product name can be infringing if it trades on a recognisable brand or personality.
For food and drink businesses, the lesson is clear: creativity in branding must be balanced with legal due diligence. A clever pun may attract attention – but if it draws on someone else’s protected rights, it may also attract a cease and desist letter.
About the author
Maria-Christina Peyman is the head of intellectual property and partner in the dispute resolution team at Birketts LLP.
