Nude vs. nude

I’ll admit it. When I saw the headline “Stella McCartney in nude fight with Ms. Bono,” I, after looking over my shoulder to make sure the coast was clear, clicked the link. Sadly, the article wasn’t quite what I was hoping for, but I read it anyway. It seems designer Stella McCartney, daughter of Beatle Paul, has been served with a big fat lawsuit for naming her new perfume line, Stella Nude.

What is wrong with that name, you might ask. It sounds fun. Stella McCartney is famous for using a nude palette for her clothing line. Nude fits with her inspiration for the scent, which is the “moment during which a woman selects her lingerie at the beginning of each day,” in other words, when she is nude (Women who select their lingerie at the end of the day will probably want a different type of perfume – something a little stronger, no doubt).

So why not name the product Stella Nude?

Well, to begin with, nude is the most overused word in fashion. It has described everything from lip gloss to pantyhose to high heel shoes. If you are successful with the name, you run the risk of being sued by someone, possibly many people, with a similar name. This is especially dangerous if you are in England where the word Nude happens to be trademarked by Bryan Meehan and Ali Hewson, wife of U2 singer Bono. It is her company, Nude Skincare, which is suing Stella McCartney (as well as YSL Beaute, which is part of L’Oreal).

Oddly, Nude Skincare does not have a perfume line. They are only suing for compensation from McCartney for using the word nude, which begs the questions: How can someone own such a common word? Can your brand ever be truly brandable when the name is already everywhere? And when are all the other lawsuits going to be filed (and against whom)? Bill Blass, Christian Dior, Bobbi Brown, and Bijan have all had perfume or skincare lines called, you guessed it, NUDE.

The regrettable part of all this is the negative publicity that Nude Skincare has brought against itself. They appear to be a wonderful company! Their objectives are to raise awareness for ecological and free trade issues in Africa. They even have a sister company EDUN (Yes, that is NUDE spelled backwards. Terrible name, great cause) that makes trendy clothes. Suing other companies like this, I would think, undermines what they stand for. Then again, maybe they are planning to use the money they win in the lawsuit to help build homes and buy medicine? That strategy worked for Robin Hood, but he never had to deal with appeals court.

Regardless, using simple, overused names is tricky territory. Using words like nude will provide an easy and quick way to get a response, but that is not always what you want. When I read about the lawsuit over the word nude, I knew I had to write about it, partly because it was interesting, but also because I knew more people would want to read about ‘nude’. I even put the word in the title … twice. And it works, but there is less at stake for me with a 600 word write-up than there is for people naming a product or a company. If you choose the simple, most obvious name, you run the risk of ridicule and having to defend your credibility. Or worse, having customers get bored with you and moving on to the next thing.

Just like in life, nude is not always the best choice. Sometimes it’s better to cover up and leave a little mystery.