Failed attempt to ‘squat’ on couple’s name might have made Harry and Meghan take step

Senior royals may have been surprised by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s announcement on Wednesday night – but the building blocks were laid as long ago as last summer.

Applications to trademark their brand “Sussex Royal” for a range of goods and activities were lodged with UK intellectual property authorities in late June by Natalie Campbell and Sara Latham, key advisers to the couple, before ownership was switched to the royal couple in December.

The manner of the application – trademarking goods and services ranging from books, stationery and clothing to promotional and public awareness campaigns – helped to add a layer of discretion, even if the couple had been expected to launch their foundation this year, and have been using “Sussex Royal” on Instagram for months.

One other, little noticed, development last year was a failed attempt in April to trademark hundreds of items from adhesive bras to energy drinks in the name of “Sussex Royal”. The application, which came from Malta in the name of John Burnett, appears to have been an attempt to “squat” on the couple’s name but fell foul of the special protection which “Royal” has in UK intellectual property law.

“It may have made the Sussexes think about the fact that people were trying to squat on their trademarks, and taken a step forward,” said Sally Britton, a partner at Mishcon de Reya and expert on intellectual property law.

But it was interesting, she added, that registers showed the couple only appeared to have filed in the UK. Anyone expecting a major brand launch might have expected an international filing programme, but that could change at any time.

In other ways, much of their approach was typical: “Filing a trademark application is recommended so that you can secure monopoly protection and that is what they have done here in the UK. What you are not seeing here is them filing for things like razors or beauty products. It’s quite a tight specification.”

One potentially interesting flashpoint could come, however, if the Queen refuses to give consent to the use of “Royal” in future trademark applications by the couple.

The involvement of Latham, the couple’s communications secretary who worked for the Clintons in the US, and Campbell, who last year became their director of insight and innovation after moving from the role as an aide to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, reflects the extent to which women have been central to their project.

Latham has been dubbed by sections of the press as one of the “wise women” around the couple – the others being private secretary Fiona Mcilwham, who has two decades of experience at the foreign office, and Heather Wong, their assistant private secretary who has experience of US government and politics.

But hard-nosed financial counsel will also be needed if they are to replace funding streams such as the £4.9m paid by Prince Charles to his sons from his Duchy of Cornwall estate. Harry’s share accounts for 95% of the couple’s income.

Other wealth includes his estimated £20m inheritance from his mother, some £7m which came from his great-grandmother, and Meghan’s own past earnings. Her net worth has been put at around £4m, having earned around £37,000 per episode as an actor in the legal drama, Suits.

Play Video 3:42 Prince Harry and Meghan's 'bombshell' plans explained – video

The question of just how much the Sussexes could make “unshackled” from Buckingham Palace is hard to gauge, but one guide is the couple’s wedding. It generated £1bn for the British economy, including a tourist spend of £300m in travel and accommodation and £50m on merchandise, according to an estimate by the consultancy Brand Finance.

Two new appointed directors of their foundation in September were Stefan Paul Allesch-Taylor, a financier behind a number of coffee brands, and Steven Cooper, a former banker.

But it is within Meghan’s professional background on the other side of the Atlantic where the most intriguing possibilities lie. A hint of a potential future direction lies in a corner of the couple’s newly launched website via a link to MadebyArticle, a digital creative agency in Toronto, where she lived when filming Suits.

Previously responsible for her old lifestyle brand, Tig, the Sussexes are listed alongside other clients including menswear label Hypebeast and Tokyo Smoke – a lifestyle cannabis brand “helping Canada celebrate legalisation”.

Christine Ross, one of the founders of Effervescence Group, a content and consultancy business which has made a fortune out of building up the fashion blog Meghan’s Mirror in parallel with her rise, suggested that possible future ventures that combined commercial opportunities with their charitable projects could include Prince Harry’s Apple TV+ project with Oprah, spotlighting mental health.

She added: “I think that a charitably-based clothing line, perhaps with an emphasis on sustainability … would be an incredibly popular business venture that the Sussexes could undertake – similar to the Duchess of Sussex’s ‘Smart Set’ capsule collection for her patronage, SmartWorks.”

A return to television and film meanwhile is considered much less likely, however coveted she would be by Hollywood moguls.

“Personally, I would be amazed if she went back to film,” said Bumble Ward, a veteran publicist-turned-studio executive in Los Angeles.