The Grammys Sic Lawyers On New York’s Gay-Nightlife Glammy Awards

You’d think the Grammys would have bigger fish to fry—like being increasingly irrelevant year after year—but apparently the music industry’s top dogs are going after drag queen Cherry Jubilee for trademark infringement.

Our scandal sister Michael Musto reports that when Jubilee tried to trademark the Glammy Awards, the annual drag, DJ and go-go event she’s been holding for 14 years, attorneys for the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences got all up in her face.

“I’ve been fighting them myself—since I can’t afford lawyers—for over a year. They’ve tried every trick and maneuver in the dirty playbook. And they got my request for one denied,” says Jubliee. “And now, not being happy enough with that, they are threatening me and XL (the venue where we are holding Glammys this year) with lawsuits… demanding we not use the name… They feel the similarities would cause confusion and ‘damage’ their mark. It’s absurd.”

The drag diva makes the salient point that there’s already another Glammy Awards, sponsored by Glamour magazine, and they’ve never been hit with a cease-and-desist order. She’s still fighting the good fight, but to avoid any unpleasantness this year, Jubilee has “officially” renamed it the Glam Awards.

Honestly, with nominees like Katy Perry and Nicki Minaj, aren’t the Grammys halfway to being a drag show anyway?

Photo: Glammy Awards

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #amandalepore #cherryjubilee #dragqueens stories and more


  • Mr. Enemabag Jones

    Wow. Homophobic media attacking gay people. How shocking is that?

  • jwrappaport

    I read sic as the Latin [sic] and was very confused. Anyway, this is not an issue of homophobia, at least as far the article goes, but rather overzealous lawyers trying to protect their trademark. Seems on its face that the Glammys fit into the parody exception to trademark infringement, but it’s a pretty murky doctrine.

  • gaym50ish

    jwrappaport, I somewhat disagree with you that it’s not an issue of homophobia. If it were any other type of event, the Grammy Awards would probably not be so zealous about protecting the name from “confusion.”
    I compare it to the U.S. Olympic Committee, which filed suit to prevent the Gay Games from being called the “Gay Olympics,” as it was originally called when it started in 1982. In spite of the fact that they have lent the name to everything from the Special Olympics to the California Fire and Police Olympics, the committee members refused to grant the same courtesy to a gay event.
    The Olympics organization could never have owned the ancient name under ordinary U.S. trademark law, so Congress granted them exclusive rights to it in 1978.

  • jwrappaport

    @gaym50ish: In the words of Gilbert and Sullivan, “We yield! We yield!” Fair point. I didn’t realize that about the Olympics trademark. That makes me very angry, and I’d be interested to know what other Grammy infringers are being given a pass perhaps…anyone know anything about that?

Comments are closed.