Prince’s estate has launched a contentious legal battle against Patty “Apollonia” Kotero, demanding she relinquish the professional name that made her famous four decades ago. The dispute centers on the ownership of the “Apollonia” name, which Kotero has used consistently since her breakout role in Prince’s 1984 film “Purple Rain,” where she portrayed the character that would become her professional identity.
The legal confrontation escalated when Prince’s estate filed applications with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for “Apollonia” trademarks covering clothing and entertainment services. These applications were initially rejected because Kotero already held registrations for the name.
In response, the estate filed petitions to cancel Kotero’s existing trademark registrations, arguing that contracts from 1983-84 transferred ownership of the name to Prince. Kotero contends that no valid contract exists transferring rights to the name, and that Prince himself never objected to her use of “Apollonia” during his lifetime.
Her legal team emphasizes that any statute of limitations on potential breach claims has long expired, and the doctrine of laches applies—meaning the estate’s delay in enforcement has prejudiced Kotero’s rights after decades of unchallenged use. Kotero has now filed a lawsuit in California seeking exclusive rights to the name she has used professionally for decades.
“I’ve built my entire career around this name,” Kotero reportedly stated in court filings, noting her continued professional activities including podcast hosting under the Apollonia brand.
The estate maintains that Kotero contractually waived rights to use the name professionally when working with Prince, insisting, “The agreements are clear and enforceable despite the passage of time.”
This case highlights the complex intersection of trademark rights and contractual obligations in the entertainment industry. The outcome could influence how performance rights organizations manage identity-based disputes between artists and estates in the future. Legal experts suggest the outcome could establish precedent for similar disputes involving performer names tied to famous artists.
The matter now awaits resolution in U.S. District Court, with the parallel USPTO proceedings potentially influencing the litigation’s outcome. Industry observers note that Kotero’s decades of uncontested use might weigh heavily in judicial considerations of ownership rights.
Kotero’s extensive entertainment career includes her role on the popular television series Falcon Crest in 1985, further cementing her professional identity under the Apollonia name.
For aspiring artists watching this case unfold, it underscores the importance of personal brand protection when establishing a career in the music industry.
