LG IP argy-bargy as name-swap shame engulfs City stalwart
Confusion broke out around the City this week as it emerged that Korean mobile phone manufacturer LG is changing its name to Lawrence Graham in a dramatic re-branding exercise. The technology giant has changed its name and adopted a new pastel corporate livery as it diversifies into mid-tier property work, some obscure private clienty stuff no-one really understands and supervising the occasional listing on the Alternative to a Real Stock Exchange (ARSE).
May 16, 2007 at 08:37 PM
2 minute read
Confusion broke out around the City this week as it emerged that Korean mobile phone manufacturer LG is changing its name to Lawrence Graham in a dramatic re-branding exercise.
The technology giant has changed its name and adopted a new pastel corporate livery as it diversifies into mid-tier property work, some obscure private clienty stuff no-one really understands and supervising the occasional listing on the Alternative to a Real Stock Exchange (ARSE).
Sources for the original Lawrence Graham said the firm was considering its options in light of the manufacturer's decision, with legal action a "definite possibility".
"We have worked for decades to create a uniquely unremarkable identity founded on mid-tier cuddliness and unspectacular financial performance," fumed one Lawrence Graham partner. "We won't give that up without a fight – or at least not without sending a strongly-worded letter on our new 'the Real Lawrence Graham' headed paper. I mean, our name even has the word 'law' in it. What could be clearer than that?"
However, LG insiders claimed the law firm "had started it" by using a shortened 'LawGram' epithet on its website, clearly designed to imply the firm was almost as interesting as a vast electronics conglomerate.
The controversy follows similar moves by rival telecoms giants including Siemens & Siemens and CMS Cameron Marconi, as they pursue the kind of edgy brand awareness that can only be achieved by middle-aged men in grey suits doing paperwork somewhere near Liverpool Street.
Rumours that City law firm Olswang is set to change its name to Radio Rentals in a tit-for-tat move are as yet unconfirmed.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAshurst Beijing Chief Representative Leaves for New York Boutique Sterlington
Baker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Axiom-Ince: SFO Charges Five, Including Former Head, Following Investigation
3 minute readSDT Upholds SLAPP Claim Against Osborne Clarke Partner Advising Nadhim Zahawi
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250