As the legal battle over the “Apollonia” trademark enters its latest phase, Patty Kotero, widely known by her professional name Apollonia, finds herself locked in an increasingly contentious dispute with Prince’s estate over the rights to the name she has used for more than four decades.
Kotero, who co-starred with Prince in the iconic 1984 film “Purple Rain,” filed a lawsuit in August 2025 in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles seeking declaration of her exclusive trademark rights. The legal action came in response to what her attorneys described as an “aggressive campaign” by Paisley Park Enterprises, the entity managing Prince’s estate, to secure federal trademark rights to “Apollonia” for clothing and entertainment services.
Central to the dispute are contracts Kotero signed in 1983 and 1984, which the estate claims transferred ownership of the name to Prince—an interpretation Kotero vehemently contests.
The battle hinges on decades-old contracts—paperwork the estate interprets as transferring the “Apollonia” name to Prince himself.
What makes the case particularly notable is that throughout Prince’s lifetime, neither he nor his representatives ever objected to Kotero’s continued use of the name professionally.
The estate has been persistent in its trademark pursuit, filing multiple actions with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in 2018, 2021, and most recently in 2025. Their strategy appears to be part of a broader pattern of aggressive trademark protection, which has affected other Prince collaborators including Morris Day.
For Kotero, the stakes couldn’t be higher. The “Apollonia” name has become inextricably linked to her identity and serves as the foundation of her livelihood, from merchandise to her podcast ventures. Court documents emphasize that these actions could pose serious threats to her livelihood and identity.
A ruling against her could effectively end her ability to use the name professionally after decades of public association.
The case highlights the complex questions surrounding ownership of stage names that evolve into brands, particularly when created in collaborative artistic contexts.
As the legal proceedings continue, the outcome may establish important precedents for how posthumous estates can control creative assets with multiple stakeholders in the entertainment industry.
Kotero’s lawsuit specifically contests the estate’s attempt to cancel her trademark, which she has been using professionally for decades without any objection during Prince’s lifetime.
Music industry experts note that this case illustrates the importance of artists establishing diverse income streams to protect themselves against potential intellectual property disputes that could threaten their primary revenue sources.
Throughout this legal battle, Kotero has leveraged social media platforms to engage with fans and maintain her personal brand while navigating the uncertainty surrounding her professional name.
