EXCLUSIVE: Chris Brown Settles Legal Battle Accusing Him Of Stealing Graffiti Artists Name

EXCLUSIVE: Chris Brown Settles Legal Battle Accusing Him Of Stealing Graffiti Artists Name

Chris Brown

Chris Brown Settles Legal Battle w/ Graffiti Artist

theJasmineBRAND.com exclusively reports, Chris Brown has reached a settlement in the legal battle with a famous street artist – who accused the singer of ripping off his work. A confidential deal has been signed that will officially close the case.

Here’s the latest: On June 28th, docs were filed in the case explaining earlier in the month that a settlement conference was held where the singer personally showed up with his lawyers. During the meeting a confidential settlement was reached between the singer and street artist, Konfused. Per the deal, all claims against Chris will be dismissed and the case officially closed.

Here’s the backstory: Street artist, Konfused, sued the singer accusing him of ripping off his famous mark.

The artist – real name Andre Khazrei – has been tagging walls and signing paintings with the mark since 2003, years before Chris decided to use the name, Konfuzed, for his clothing line.

The man said he obtained a copyright for his trademark to use for t-shirts and other merchandise. He accused the singer of infringing on his mark and ripping off his name, which only confused the consumers.

He even pointed out that Chris had signed a painting at the L.A. Grammy Museum with “Konfused” not “Konfuzed”. He filed suit demanding damages and an injunction against Chris from continuing to use his mark for the clothing line or any other purpose.

Chris responded, arguing that he did not infringe on any trademarks owned by the street artist and accused the man of committing fraud with the Trademark Office.

He denied owing the artist compensation and disputed his suggestion that an injunction be entered against him. Chris believed the claims were barred because the artist failed to comply with the requirements to obtain the trademark.

Further, he claimed none of his alleged conduct was malicious and was with innocent intent, saying he never engaged in willful or improper conduct. The singer pointed out that he has never represented or suggested that any of his products were attributed to the street artist or endorsed by him

Chris said the plaintiff’s trademark is invalid and unenforceable and demanded the entire lawsuit be thrown out.

Follow us: @theJasmineBRAND on Twitter | theJasmineBRAND on Facebook| theJasmineBRAND_ on Instagram

Authored by: Kellie Williams