FCA authorised · FRN 724952 0117 325 0027Quote & buy →
Aipedia: Marketing and PR agencies
AI-generated brand names and logos can infringe existing trade marks just as easily as human ideas, and a tool will not warn you. Agencies are exposed because clients rely on them to recommend a name or mark they can safely use.
Part of: AI in Marketing and PR agencies
In short
Agencies may use AI to generate names, taglines and logo concepts quickly, but outputs can resemble existing registered or unregistered marks. Getty Images v Stability AI shows how trade mark and passing off arguments can arise from generative outputs. IPA/ISBA principles ask agencies to consider IP holders and check permissions. When a client is challenged and has to rebrand, it may claim the costs from the agency. PI may cover negligent advice, subject to the wording, while trade mark infringement claims and rebrand costs may be limited or excluded.
Branding agencies and in-house creative teams may use AI to generate long lists of brand names, product names and taglines, and to produce logo concepts, icons and visual identities. A generative AI chatbot can suggest hundreds of names in minutes; an image generator can produce dozens of logo variations. The tools are good at producing names and marks that feel familiar, and that is exactly why they can collide with existing trade marks. A model has no knowledge of the registers and may reproduce a mark it has seen many times.
Trade mark law protects registered marks and, through passing off, unregistered goodwill. A new name or logo that is identical or similar to an existing mark for similar goods or services may infringe, whatever tool produced it. Getty Images v Stability AI [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) shows how trade mark and passing off arguments can arise around generative outputs: one of the issues tried was the appearance of Getty watermarks in generated images.
The IPA/ISBA principles ask agencies to consider IP holders (principle 7) and check permissions (principle 10). The ordinary duty of reasonable skill and care also applies: if an agency recommends a name or logo, the client will expect it to have taken sensible steps to check it, or to have said clearly that it has not.
Illustrative scenario: an agency uses AI to generate names for a client's new software product. The client chooses one, the agency designs an AI-assisted logo, and the launch goes ahead after a quick web search. Six months later, an established company with a similar registered mark in the same class sends a cease and desist letter. The client rebrands, destroys stock and marketing materials, and claims the costs from the agency, arguing it should have advised on clearance.
The problem can be one of expectations. The client hears a recommendation and assumes the agency has checked availability; the agency sees itself as supplying creative options and assumes the client's lawyers will clear them. Without a written statement of who does what, both sides can sincerely believe the other was responsible.
Other risks include logos that unintentionally resemble a known mark, AI-generated icons that copy stock or competitor graphics, and names that are descriptive or otherwise unregistrable, leaving the client unable to protect its brand.
This can be a grey area. A client's claim that the agency negligently advised on a name or failed to warn that clearance was needed is, in principle, a professional negligence claim, which PI may cover, subject to the wording. A trade mark owner's infringement claim against the agency is different and depends on whether the policy includes IP cover and whether trade marks are excluded; some wordings cover copyright but not trade mark infringement. Rebrand costs can also be treated as consequential loss. See AI IP infringement insurance, consequential loss and PI or media liability for AI claims.
Visual identities often share the IP issues in AI-generated images in ads, and liability terms are covered in AI clauses in agency client contracts. Visit the marketing and PR agencies hub for the full series.
How Apex helps: Apex arranges PI for branding and design agencies. A broker reviews whether your policy covers trade mark claims and advice on naming and identity work.
Yes. Infringement depends on similarity to an existing mark and the goods or services involved, not on how the name was created. A tool may suggest names close to well-known brands without any warning.
Initially the client, which may then look to the agency if it believes the agency should have advised on clearance. Whether the agency is liable depends on what it agreed to do and the advice it gave, which is why written scope matters.
Some policies do, some cover only copyright, and some exclude trade marks entirely. Negligent advice claims by the client may be treated differently from infringement claims by the mark owner. Check the wording with your broker.
A client can usually apply to register a logo as a trade mark if it is distinctive and does not conflict with earlier rights. Copyright in AI-generated works is less certain, and UK law on AI and copyright is still under review.
Tell us about your firm and the work you do. A broker will review how your current PI treats AI-assisted work, or arrange new cover. No fee for a quote. Or call 0117 325 0027.
Start a PI quote Request a callbackApex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information about how AI is used in the profession and how insurance may respond. It is not legal, regulatory or insurance advice on your circumstances, and it does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.
