Somehow, the theft of Rory’s name was as unforgivable as stealing his skin; or so her grief told her. A skin was nothing. Pigs had skins; snakes had skins. They were knitted of dead cells, shed and grown and shed again. But a name? That was a spell, which summoned memories. She would not let Frank usurp it.
— Clive Barker, The Hellbound Heart, page 156, Harper Fiction, 1986

Names have a peculiar sort of power. They convey not only basic identity, but a whole range of associations. Our names identify us as individuals, but also demonstrate our family relationships and the level of formality we expect from others. Names evoke not only the concept of a person, but memories of that person, thoughts, and emotions. In business, a name can become a brand, something that has economic value in its own right. Our names represent us as four-dimensional beings, identifying who we are, who we have been, and who we may yet be. One’s name may very well be one’s most precious asset.

Unless, of course, you sign away the rights to your own name.

That’s what Brian Tierney allegedly did when he sold Tierney Communications in 1998, according to the aptly-named lawsuit Tierney v. Tierney, filed in a Philadelphia court in November 2012. The lawsuit, brought by Tierney Communications’ owner, Interpublic Group of Companies, alleges that Tierney’s new business, Brian Communications Group, misuses Tierney’s own name in a way that creates confusion. The new company allegedly uses the phrase “A Brian Tierney Company” in its marketing, which Intergroup doesn’t much like.

As odd as it may seem to lack the right to use your own name, if that’s what Brian Tierney signed, then that’s how it is. According to philly.com, the contract stated that he threw in the rights to use his name in connection with a public-relations or similar business “in consideration of the considerable monies paid to him.” So, you know, they paid for it. Freedom of contract and all that.

This was a plot point, actually, on the third-season finale of Treme, where chef Janette Desautel hosts a charity event using her own name, which happens to also be the name of the restaurant she co-owns with a douchey businessman. Her business partner is furious that she used a banner with a modification of the restaurant’s name, and reminds her that he owns the right to use the name (her name) with or without her. This is why you read the fine print, kids.

(h/t to Antonin Pribetic for bringing the story to my attention)

Photo credit: “Badge” by Gastonmag on stock.xchng.