There has been some confusion and misinformation regarding the Tammy Taylor intellectual property, specifically the Tammy Taylor trademarks, in the news and on social media.  We’ve decided to set the record straight.

The stylised trademark (a trademark consisting of stylised words and/or a logo and/or a specific font), is shown in the picture below:

tammy taylor logo

is registered in the name of Tammy Taylor Inc. (“Tammy Taylor US”), a company registered in the United States of America. Justsmart Mobile (Pty) Limited (“Justsmart”) first sought registration of this trademark in June 2016, with Melany Juanita Viljoen as its sole director (Justsmart went through several name changes.  Its current name is Royalty Recovery). According to the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) records, Justsmart assigned all rights in and to this trademark to Tammy Taylor US Tammy Taylor US is thus the current proprietor of this registered trademark.

A trademark application for the stylised trademark (a trademark consisting of stylised words and/or a logo and/or a specific font) shown in the figure below:

was initially filed by Justsmart.  However, all rights in and to this trademark application were assigned from Justsmart to Tammy Taylor US, who is now the sole applicant for this trademark’s registration.  The registrar of trademarks has provisionally refused the trademark application, but assuming the current applicant, Tammy Taylor US, is interested to apply, they could address the registrar’s objections and hopefully have the trademark application granted (i.e., the trademark registered). It should be noted that the assignment of the application from Justsmart to Tammy Taylor US was not declined. Tammy Taylor US is the single applicant, and the assignment has been recorded. It’s the registration of this trademark that has been provisionally refused.

Tammy Taylor US is also the registered proprietor of the following registered trademarks:


This registered trademark consisting of the words “Tammy Taylor” in block letters, provides the broadest protection possible.

The aforementioned trademarks, and the pending trademark application, were filed in classes 3, 35 and 44, which cover cosmetics, perfumes, soaps, business services, professional services, beauty care, etc.

Tammy Taylor US cancelled a master license granted under their intellectual property, including their trademarks to Peet and Mel Viljoen. Peet and Mel Viljoen are no longer authorised to utilise the Tammy Taylor US trademarks or any trademark that is confusingly similar to the Tammy Taylor trademarks. Peet and Mel Viljoen are also not authorised to grant or maintain sublicenses/franchises using the Tammy Taylor trademarks.  This means that the franchisees/sublicensees are similarly no longer authorised to use the Tammy Taylor US trademarks or any trademark that is confusingly similar to the Tammy Taylor US trademarks.

No person, including Peet and Mel Viljoen, may sell any Tammy Taylor trademarked products unless it’s the original, authorised product to which Tammy Taylor Inc. itself applied any of its trademarks. Therefore, they may sell original Tammy Taylor products that originated from Tammy Taylor. For example, if you buy a can of Coca-Cola®, you may resell it to someone else. You may not, however, obtain Coca-Cola’s soft drink, fill your own cans, and apply the Coca-Cola® trademark to such cans. A trademark’s function is to indicate origin. Your filled and labelled “Coca-Cola®” cans do not originate from Coca-Cola, they come from you. You should label the cans with your own name.

Another example: If a Mr A obtains sekelbos wood (a small tree that makes for excellent firewood) from a farmer, then bundles the wood and marks the bundles as “Mr A’s” and distributes the bundled and marked firewood, a Mr B, who also obtains sekelbos from the same farmer, cannot label his bundles “Mr A’s” as Mr B’s bundles do not originate from Mr A. The product (bundled firewood) for sale by Mr B, is offered for sale by him, and not Mr A.

So, even if Peet Viljoen obtains the same product from the same manufacturer (as he alleges), he cannot package/bottle/pot the product and label it with any Tammy Taylor trademark.

We hope this clarifies the legal position.


Per: Karel Bredenkamp