After nearly four decades of using the stage name given to her by Prince, Patty Kotero, professionally known as Apollonia, finds herself embroiled in a contentious legal battle with the late musician’s estate over trademark rights. The dispute erupted when Paisley Park Enterprises LLC, which manages Prince’s intellectual property, filed to cancel Kotero’s trademarks for “Apollonia” and “Apollonia 6” in June 2025, simultaneously applying for its own registration of the “Apollonia” name.
A decades-long stage identity now caught in the crossfire of posthumous intellectual property claims.
Kotero, who received the moniker from Prince in 1983 when cast in his iconic film “Purple Rain,” secured trademark registrations in 2016 and 2018, respectively. She has now responded with a federal lawsuit seeking declaration of her exclusive trademark rights, arguing that Prince himself encouraged her use of the name throughout his lifetime without objection until his death in 2016.
The legal stakes are significant for Kotero, who left Prince’s organization in 1985 to pursue an independent career that included a solo album in 1988, roles in “Falcon Crest” and various films, and most recently, hosting her “Apollonia Studio 6” podcast since 2022. The case has noteworthy parallels to a similar dispute involving Morris Day regarding the use of “the Time” name. The case, titled Kotero v. Paisley Park Enterprises, is currently before the Central District of California awaiting initial court proceedings. If unsuccessful, she may face trademark infringement actions or be forced to abandon the professional identity she’s maintained for decades.
The estate, meanwhile, dismisses Kotero’s lawsuit as “frivolous,” basing its claim on contracts allegedly signed in 1983-1984 that it argues grant ownership of the name to Prince’s business entities. Representatives for Paisley Park Enterprises maintain that all intellectual property connected to Prince’s legacy, including stage names he created, remain under the estate’s legal control.
This trademark dispute highlights the complex intersection of personal identity and intellectual property rights in the entertainment industry. While Kotero emphasizes her continuous professional use and Prince’s verbal consent, the estate counters with written agreements from the early 1980s, setting the stage for a potentially precedent-setting legal showdown over an artist’s right to their professional identity versus contractual obligations. The outcome could significantly impact how musicians protect their income streams and intellectual property in an industry where name recognition directly influences earning potential. Music industry experts note that proper registration with performing rights organizations is crucial for artists seeking to establish and monetize their professional identities.
