Angelina Jolie Faces Trademark Challenge from Pennsylvania Artist Over “Atelier Jolie” Name
A dispute over the Atelier Jolie brand is unfolding between actress and activist Angelina Jolie and artist Omnaia Jolie Abdou, raising questions about intellectual property rights and the potential for celebrity branding to overshadow existing creative ventures. The conflict centers on the use of the name “Atelier Jolie,” with Abdou claiming prior use and filing a formal opposition to Jolie’s trademark application.
The controversy emerged after Jolie opened a multifunctional space in Manhattan in 2023, located at 57 Great Jones Street – a historically significant location previously occupied by the studios of Andy Warhol and Jean-Michel Basquiat. The New York location features a clothing store, Turkish café, and workshops for artisans, aiming to be “a place for co-creation and discovery” of global craftsmanship and design.
However, according to reports from the US Sun and Artnews, Abdou established Atelier Jolie in Easton, Pennsylvania, in 2021. Abdou, an artist, curator, and entrepreneur, has formally opposed Jolie’s trademark application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, arguing that her brand was established first.
In documentation submitted to the USPTO, Abdou asserts that her Atelier Jolie “is used primarily to identify and promote goods and services of an art and design studio featuring my work.” This includes a range of artistic creations, such as personalized art pieces, luxury clothing, paintings, sculptures, ceramics, and posters. Currently, her website advertises the opening of a new location in Easton scheduled for February 2025, and features a 38cm vase titled “Derriere,” inspired by the female body, priced at $497.
Jolie’s legal team responded by stating that “there is no real competition between the two exercises and that there is virtually no risk of confusion” for the public. Sources familiar with the negotiations revealed to the Sun that lawyers representing both parties have been engaged in discussions for months, potentially leading to an out-of-court settlement that could involve a financial agreement from Jolie for the use of the name.
The New York space currently hosts an exhibition dedicated to photographer Jeremy Dennis, a member of the Shinnecock ethnic group, whose work explores indigenous identity. This focus on global craftsmanship and design underscores Jolie’s vision for the space as a hub for creative exchange.
The situation highlights the complexities of navigating intellectual property rights in the age of celebrity branding. It remains to be seen whether a financial settlement will be reached, or if the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will side with Abdou, potentially forcing Jolie to rebrand her New York venture. Ultimately, the case raises a fundamental question: can both ventures coexist, or will the power of celebrity influence ultimately determine the outcome?
