The Trademark Lies

Last week, I posted a podcast of Alexandra Grant claiming that she can sell her trademarked jewelry if it was related to charity.

https://archive.org/details/TheConversation3WayEpisode5

Another person who listened to the podcast stated that she never discussed it as a lawsuit or named Cartier but talked about spending a "couple of years sorting it out." It was a group discussion but when other people tried to talk, Grant raised her voice or said "no, no" so they couldn't interrupt, especially when they talked about making money and she referred to art money as "funny money" several times.

Another person also sends me screenshots of the filing and adamantly explained that Alexandra Grant is lying on two counts: (1) she does not have a trademark for her caged love jewelry, and never has & (2) she does not have an agreement (with Cartier) to be able to sell caged love trademarked jewelry as long as it is for charity.

Further explanation: She originally tried to get a trademark for the jewelry by saying it was for charity (non-profits) even though she clearly did not have non-profit status. Cartier was not fooled and objected to her infringement on their trademark. Due to Cartier’s objection, on May 1, 2012, Grant removed class 14 and class 30. Class 14 is for jewelry. Her logo is accepted for class 018 and 025. 

To this day, she has not been open and honest about her finances and still is not operating as a non-profit, so Cartier was correct in not trusting her "philanthropy business model." At NO point in time has Grant ever had a trademark for her caged love logo jewelry. 

TODAY she still does not have non-profit status so any jewelry she sells has no accounting transparency for what she keeps and what is donated. She could easily get non-profit status if she wanted to be a REAL philanthropist.

My note: I was giving her the benefit of the doubt that there was an agreement to sell it for charity but honesty doesn't come easy to Alexandra Grant.