The Sussexes are free to name their charity ‘Archewell’ after a challenge was dropped

Gigi Hadid Photo Call for Michael Kors W...

If you’ve noticed, I’ve been completely ignoring the Lady Colin Campbell stuff from the British tabloids for months. In March, we did discuss how Lady Colin is writing a “biography” of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. She’s written other books about the royals, but don’t confuse her with the more authorized biographies of the royals. Lady Colin doesn’t care about any of that. She’s in the mud-slinging business and she loves to talk sh-t, and Meghan and Harry are the best targets she’s had in a while. She’s been particularly unhinged for weeks, spreading all kinds of stupid stale tea and/or false gossip. And I’m choosing to ignore all of it. I find it a bit like the Piers Morgan crap – there are people attacking the Sussexes with such vitriol and false information, it has to be coming from somewhere. Until we know, let’s just deny Lady Colin the oxygen she needs. Because I have no interest in covering her inane ramblings.

Meanwhile, in more mundane news, it looks like Harry and Meghan will be able to name their foundation “Archewell” after all. And instead of reporting it straight, the Daily Mail’s Talk of the Town used the word “humiliate” like five times.

They have had their share of setbacks in naming their non-profit venture – but Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have finally received some long-overdue good news from the American courts. A major challenge to them using the name Archewell, in tribute to their son Archie, has been dropped, saving them from the humiliation of having to come up with yet another name.

They had faced opposition from the New York healthcare boss Scott Kantro, who wanted to trademark the name Archecares for a rival charity. But they can breathe a sigh of relief, as Mr Kantro’s application is now dead in the water after he failed to respond to a court request for extra information in time. The news comes just weeks after the Sussexes’ first application to trademark Archewell was rejected because their legal team didn’t sign the application form, they failed to pay the fees required and the proposal was deemed ‘too vague’. They have until August to comply.

An insider said: ‘The name is a huge deal for Harry and Meghan. It would have been humiliating if they had to go back to the drawing board and come up with something different after announcing the name to the world.’

The couple initially wanted to call their project Sussex Royal, but were banned from doing so after they stepped away from official life. They plan to set up emotional support groups, a multimedia educational empire, and a wellbeing website, similar to Meghan’s defunct blog, The Tig.

[From The Daily Mail]

Their first trademark application was not “rejected,” the Sussexes made that clear to People Magazine and other outlets. This is all about the lack of access to the Sussexes, to be clear – the British papers keep trying to make scandalous mountains out of mundane molehills. It’s not enough that Meghan and Harry are “not allowed” to use Sussex Royal for any of their branding, the British papers have to *punish* them for having a foundation, naming it something, living in a mansion, going through a trademark process, and… yeah, existing. Anyway, don’t hate me I still think “Archewell” is a stupid name and I wish they would just call their sh-t Sussex Royal anyway.

Carine Restoin-Roitfeld arrives at the 2019 Harper's BAZAAR Celebration of 'ICONS By Carine Roitfeld' held at The Plaza Hotel on September 6, 2019 in Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid and social media.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

37 Responses to “The Sussexes are free to name their charity ‘Archewell’ after a challenge was dropped”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Becks1 says:

    I’m not a huge fan of Archewell either but I think like with many things, in a few years Archewell will be successful and well-known and the name will just be…..the name.

    And the Daily Mail is so ticked about their lack of access. Emily Andrews even said that on twitter – that they don’t have any access to the Sussexes so its hard to cover them. Doesn’t slow down the DM, but I think it explains why some of the stories are so ridiculous – they basically aren’t any different from the average twitter user (raises hand) in terms of what they know about Meghan and Harry’s work.

    • Britt says:

      The bags have effectively stopped for them. If you notice that when Harry and Meghan publicly cut off the tabloids, Those stories were and are getting less attention especially in America. That’s why people like Katie Nicholl are desperately trying to keep a foot in America because they all know where the money is and it’s not the Cambridge’s. They see that the longer Harry and Meghan stay away and I doubt they’ll ever go back, the more irrelevant the British media will become. Also I think the Daily Mail are trying to get on Harry’s good side again because I saw on Rebecca English’ twitter that they delivered PPE to Wellchild. I don’t know if that was meant to be shady or a sneaky way to get on his good his again but it was strange.

      • ABritGuest says:

        Britt funny you mention that because Lorraine did a promo for WellChild and Dan Wootton had the CEO on his radio show to discuss a campaign. These types never really discussed the Sussexes patronages whilst they were in the U.K. so was wondering about this sudden outreach.

        As Robert Jobson said they hadn’t seen this level of international attention in the royal family since Diana. All these podcasts& royal dedicated shows (even a streaming service) popped up of back of Harry& Meghan’s wedding. The royal reporters and experts were dining good with lots of international tv appearances etc. The reporters fumbled the bag with the smear campaign helping to drive the Sussexes out and even worse with COVID impacting public engagements for the foreseeable future- probably going to be hard to fill all those podcasts with content.

      • Britt says:

        @ABritGuest, thinking about it, Chris ship also had Tessa from the Diana Legacy on his podcast to talk about Meghan, BLM and why Meghan left the UK as if Harry and others haven’t been calling them out for the last three years. But from what Im gathering is they want information because he tried to get some from her asking if they had been in contact with the Sussexes because Harry and Meghan are an ocean away and there are no more leaks and they still want access despite saying how irrelevant they are. Like I said, they all know where the money is and it’s not Clarence House or Kensingston Palace. Who are these people fooling and I wonder if they’re trying to butter them up to give them leaks especially if those newspapers and channels give these charities the help they need.

      • TheAnonymousPimpernel says:

        The CEO of WellChild was stupid and fumbled their own donation bag going on Dan Wootton’s show.

      • Ruby_Woo says:

        @Britt: The entire ITV podcast that Chris hosts is a result of Harry and Meghan’s wedding. And good for Tessa for calling out the double-standard in treatment of Kate and Meghan.

        It is so bemusing that these RRs watch her be bullied for years and now are going ‘hmmm… was racism involved…?’

        I think all the RRs got greedy and thought they would never leave – too bad!

    • Chica1971 says:

      I think DM is trying to throw as many different stories and versions out there because they have no idea what’s min the book. They’ve moved on to “gang ho and did not do her research” to describe Megan and acknowledging that Kate told Harry Megan was “ too different “.. BP and CH need to convene a meeting and come up with a credible strategy..they are literally throwing too much stuff at the wall.

      • ABritGuest says:

        @Britt I think you are right- they are probably trying to get tea from the charities. At first I thought they were just trying to prove a point that the Sussexes did need the tabloids to promote their charities.

        @Chica, who is reporting that Kate told Harry that Meghan was too different? I find that hard to believe

  2. Sam says:

    It wasn’t a challenge,the Archecares application was filed before their one and has absolutely nothing to do with their application.

    • SomeChick says:

      This. Also, what is “rival charity” supposed to even mean? That’s a rather bizarre way of thinking about it.

  3. dewdrop says:

    how do you say it? arch-well? or archie-well?

  4. Jess says:

    Never understood why they didn’t continue to use Sussex, without the Royal. I mean, it’s their name right? The Sussex Foundation. The Sussex Instagram feed. No Prob?

    • BW says:

      Better to completely break away from anything royal family, incase the royal family decides that Sussex is off limits in the future, too.

    • Mara says:

      A lot of Sussex trademarks that don’t include the word Royal are probably already taken by organisations actually based in Sussex

  5. S808 says:

    I’m used to the name. It sounds like a charity name. Sussex Royal does not and I’m glad they didn’t choose it. No reason to tie their non profit to the royal family when we all know they’re not going back. Just being the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is enough.

  6. Britt says:

    They’re trying to sabotage them and make it seem like their struggling when it’s clear they are doing just fine. That’s why they keep talking about Harry struggling stories and why they tried to overblow the Jessica Mulroney story. They see the money train going to everyone else but them. The British Media knows that they killed the Golden Gooses and they are stuck with the most boring, bland and dull royals imaginable. These reporters used to get segments all around the world from Japan, Australia, Italy etc due to H&M, podcasts, tv shows, books as well. They had a goldmine and they realize that it’s done and the American media and international media, barring Australia, because their just as nasty and hateful will benefit. They know they pushed Harry to the limit and know the Sussexes will never return. I doubt Archie or their other children will likely go back either.

  7. LaraW” says:

    DM may as well become a law review periodical at this rate, what with all the coverage on the absolutely riveting administrative procedure involved in registering a trademark in the US. Perhaps they’ll even hire an “an expert” to provide convenient quotes on US law. Next up- close scrutiny of H&M’s 990 or 501(c)(3) filings.

  8. Molly says:

    The Dead Sea is not as salty as the DM.

    • Britt says:

      I mean I would be salty too if I was stuck with Charles, Camilla and the Cambridge’s as stories especially since no one really cares about Charles/Camilla and you have to constantly embiggen the Cambridge’s when you’re sitting on a trove of dirty secrets that could sell papers. That’s why they’re obsessed with the Sussexes because they’re not playing the game and got away from them.

    • Liz version 700 says:

      I’m here for all of the DM’s salty tears. They are so ugly. They match the Royal family and both deserve each other. I feel sorry for the Cambridge kids. All the advantages are not gonna save them from a mess of a life with that family.

  9. STRIPE says:

    @DewDrop, it’s pronounced ark-e-well if I recall correctly.

  10. notasugarhere says:

    The name may be a red herring. We won’t know until things are formally launched.

    • SomeChick says:

      If they are trademarking it, they’re probably pretty serious about using it. They may use other names for the various projects but it looks like Archewell is here to stay.

      Poor, sad Daily Fail. Poor, sad, royal reporters. Boo hoo!

      • notasugarhere says:

        Or they’re trademarking it to prevent the trolls from going after a similar name, or prevent trolls from misusing it. The obsession from those haters is something to see. Using online flight trackers to see if any flights from LA might go to London and insisting Harry is on them. Registering similar domain names and putting up pages demanding the return of the hostage prince before they’ll unlock it.

        Good news is, they had to pay to register those things. Gives the security forces their real names and addresses to add to the watch lists.

      • Ginger says:

        I never thought about the haters buying the domain. If these people think that their behavior is going to continue to go unchecked they have another thing coming.

  11. lucy2 says:

    LOL at the idea of having to rename it being “humiliating”. I think they’re probably just go, “Ok, hey guys we ran into a trademark snag so the new name is ____” and that would be the end of it. No humiliation.

  12. Harla says:

    I am so looking forward to the launch of Archewell (and to learning the pronunciation of Archewell) and to seeing what the Duke and Duchess have been working on behind the scenes. Even during lockdown, they have continued to inspire so many that when they are free to move about the world they will set it on fire!

    • Lilly (with the double-L) says:

      @Harla ha ha, me too on the pronunciation and also agreed that they will continue to do so much good in the world.

  13. RoyalBlue says:

    the number of negative words in the article like ‘humiliating’ and ‘rejected’ leads me to believe the DM had written an article prepared for the name to be rejected and were just waiting to release it, and when the outcome turned out favorable, they added in a paragraph or two and amended the negative slant slightly.

    i agree with the other posters who mentioned they are happy they did NOT use the word Sussex in the name as that would leave the door open for them to be accused of capitalizing on their royal title granted by petty betty and with the possibility of having it changed. no i agree with not picking a fight and just naming it archewell. i would not choose to go to war with the royal family as it’s just not worth it.

    • Nic919 says:

      They should save their use of humiliating for the royal foundation that has been rejected several times for a trademark in the Us.

  14. Charfromdarock says:

    Imagine being so salty over copyright processes.

  15. Anne Marie says:

    @BRITT all these are just typical attempts to try attach themselves into the Sussexs. They were expecting Sussexsquad to take it but were met with silence & side eye to their sudden concern for their patronages.
    Notice the silence from Katie Nichols after her almost daily articles about the sussexs. Nobody is taking their fictional stories as they’ve been proven to know very little and H&M are smart to be authorising charities to release their news/events till the launch of their new nonprofit

  16. Yvette says:

    @Kaiser … “Anyway, don’t hate me I still think “Archewell” is a stupid name and I wish they would just call their sh-t Sussex Royal anyway.”

    Hey, I’m not mad at you. I dislike the word as well. I also think they should have pushed the envelope and stuck to something Royal-ish, like–Sussex Duchy. It’s stupid name, but it would blatantly remind everyone (and rub noses in it a bit … I’m looking at you, Willam) that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are high ranking Royals; even if they aren’t allowed to say it. :)
    .

    • L4frimaire says:

      The name has kind of grown on me. I’m liking it more. The thing about that leak is that by the time they launch, we’ll be used to it and will focus on the organization itself, instead of the name and trademarks. However, I don’t think we have the full info on this so who knows. Would be so fun to sit in on a brainstorming session with them and their team.

  17. M Narang says:

    I prefer “Sussex” in the title as well like “Sussex Global” but the Royals would probably step on that too because the Queen bestowed the couple with that Royal title and she might insist that Andrew or Kate becomes its CEO. Lolz. In which case, removing Sussex is just safer in the long run