“Thanks so much for celebrating our story with us,” was the message from Easy Life, after playing their final gigs under that name. “See you later, maybe never.”
For the band and their thousands of fans, hopefully there will be another chapter.
The two gigs, hastily organised for London and their hometown of Leicester, came less than two weeks after they announced they were being sued by easyGroup, holding company for easyJet and other “easy” brands, over their name.
Twitter
This content is provided by Twitter, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Twitter cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Twitter cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Twitter cookies for this session only.
While it seemed “hilarious” to the band at first, they quickly realised this was no joke. In easyGroup’s lawsuit it was pointed out they had used an image of an orange and white plane, similar to the branding for easyJet, for their Life’s A Beach tour, among other accusations about reputational damage. In a statement, EasyGroup founder and chairman Sir Stelios Haji-Ioannou labelled them “brand thieves”.
The band’s supporters – including fellow musicians such as Professor Green, Arlo Parks and Mahalia, several MPs, plus UK Music chair and deputy Labour leader Tom Watson and Tom Gray, the chair of the Ivors Academy – argued any similarities were tongue in cheek and harmless, with plenty of fans offering to support a crowdfunder to raise money for legal fees.
Easy Life themselves said they were “certain in no way have we ever affected their business”.
‘David v Goliath’
Image: Pic: AP/Scott Garfitt
It was a blow that seemingly came from nowhere after a huge year: their biggest ever headline show at London’s Alexandra Palace and plans for a third album to follow their first two in 2021 and 2022, which both charted at number two in the UK. In 2022, they played Glastonbury’s famous Pyramid Stage. It was all a long way from their first gig – “no one was there, lol”, they joked on Instagram recently – in 2015.
But after initially hoping to fight the case, which they said would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds, they were forced to concede defeat, realising essentially it was “David vs Goliath – and our British legal system favours Goliath”.
“Perhaps our case will help provoke a dialogue around legal reform and justice being available to all,” they wrote in a letter to fans shared on their website.
EasyGroup have launched similar lawsuits before, detailing those that have been successful on their website – and hitting out at those who “think they can make a fast buck by stealing our name and our reputation”.
‘We are very confident’
Twitter
This content is provided by Twitter, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Twitter cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Twitter cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Twitter cookies for this session only.
James Moir, head of the charity shopping site easyfundraising, understands the band’s situation, as his company is facing a similar claim by easyGroup, brought in February 2022. Mr Moir says they will fight their case in court in 2024 – again, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds.
“It’s been incredibly drawn-out,” he said. “It’s a difficult thing to take on, hugely costly. We are very confident, that’s part of the reason we’re fighting this, but even [if you win] you don’t get all your fees back. So this is going to cost us.”
Easyfundraising’s company trademark was approved in 2010, he said, and there is nothing “remotely similar” to the easyGroup brand – aside from the word.
“It’s ludicrous,” he said. “No one owns the word ‘easy’.”
Mr Moir said he sympathises with Easy Life having to make the “impossible decision” not to fight the case, adding: “There’s got to be a more sensible way that would be better, fairer for smaller organisations, better for not clogging up the court systems. Let’s be honest, this is about corporate bullying. That’s what’s at the heart of it.”
An easyGroup spokesperson said it would not comment further on the band at this time following their decision to change their name. Of the action against easyfundraising, the spokesperson said the company was “protecting the consumer from any confusion – remember as brand thieves they are not subject to our product/service standards”.
The spokesperson continued: “It needs to be repeated that many of our partners use the easy brand name and get up as part of their business strategy – in return for an annual royalty. It cannot be remotely fair for other third parties to just pick it up and use it for free.”
Image: Easy Life’s Life’s A Beach tour poster was included in documents submitted to the High Court
Can you claim ownership of a word?
Several trademark and legal experts have been following the legal row since the story made headlines at the beginning of the month.
Emma Kennaugh-Gallacher, senior professional support lawyer at intellectual property (IP) experts Mewburn Ellis, says easyGroup has “long been zealous in policing the use of what it considers to be its proprietary ‘easy+’ mark”, but case law so far indicates “there is by no means an assumption that they can simply claim ownership to any easy+ phrase”.
It depends on context and history of use, among other factors, she added.
Josh Schuermann, IP expert for international law firm Reed Smith’s Entertainment & Media Group, says there has been an increase in these types of cases in recent years, due to social media making it “easier than ever” to create content and share information.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Helen Wakerley and Isabelle Tate, partner and associate respectively at IP law firm Reddie & Grose, said that while easyGroup does not own the word “easy” it could argue that links would be made to its brands. Any action against the name of the band alone “would have made things more challenging” for easyGroup, they said – however, Easy Life’s use of easyJet livery on merchandise and tour posters had “muddied the issue”, as “there is no parody defence to trademark infringement, which exists in copyright law”.
And Jill Bainbridge, contentious intellectual property partner at the Harper James law firm, said that while the case may “be regarded as a David v Goliath situation”, easyGroup leaving a perceived infringement unchallenged could “open the door for others to follow suit”.
‘There should be a quicker way’
For the artists now formerly known as Easy Life, the case has brought an abrupt end to a band that was very much on the up. Fans now remain hopeful of seeing them return under a new name.
For easyfundraising, they await their day in court. “We remain confident,” says Mr Moir. “But I think this brings into question, how cases like this continue to be allowed to be brought.
“If an organisation such as ourselves has had a trademark approved for 13 years and there is, you know, a very, very quick understanding and you can look and say, we’re in completely different sectors, we do completely different things, we don’t have an orange logo – a very, very quick test to prove that there is no passing off [as another brand].
“Is there not a better way that cases like this could be dealt with? It just seems wrong on every level.”
An elderly British couple who were detained by the Taliban earlier this year have been freed.
Barbie Reynolds, 76, and her husband Peter, 80, were detained by the Taliban’s interior ministry on 1 February as they travelled to their home in Bamyan province, central Afghanistan.
In March, they were moved to a maximum security prison in Kabul where they had been held without charge since.
They were safely released from detention on Friday and flown to Doha following mediation led by Qatar.
Image: Peter Reynolds was visited by Qatari diplomats last month
Sky Correspondent Cordelia Lynch was at Kabul Airport as the freed couple arrived and departed.
Mr Reynolds told her: “We are just very thankful.”
His wife added: “We’ve been treated very well. We’re looking forward to seeing our children.
“We are looking forward to returning to Afghanistan if we can. We are Afghan citizens.”
Asked by Lynch if they had a message for family and friends, Mrs Reynolds replied: “My message is God is good, as they say in Afghanistan.”
Image: Peter and Barbie Reynolds after their release
Image: Qatari and British diplomats with Barbie and Peter Reynolds on the flight to Doha
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer welcomed the news in a statement thanking Qatar.
“I welcome the release of Peter and Barbara Reynolds from detention in Afghanistan, and I know this long-awaited news will come as a huge relief to them and their family,” he said.
“I want to pay tribute to the vital role played by Qatar, including The Amir, His Highness Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al Thani, in securing their freedom.”
Richard Lindsay, the UK’s special envoy to Afghanistan, told Lynch it remained “unclear” on what grounds the couple had been detained.
He said they were “very relieved to be going home and delighted to be reunited with their family”.
Asked about the state of their health, he said: “I am not a doctor, but they are very happy.”
He added the British government’s travel advice to the country was clear. “We advise British nationals not to travel to Afghanistan. That remains the case and will remain the case,” he said.
Abdul Qahar Balkhi, a spokesperson at the Taliban government’s foreign ministry, said in a statement posted on X that the couple “violated Afghan law” and were released from prison after a court hearing.
He did not say what law the couple were alleged to have broken.
Image: Pic: Sarah Entwistle
Image: Pic: Reynolds family
Qatar, the energy-rich nation on the Arabian Peninsula that mediated talks between the US and the Taliban before the American withdrawal, helped in releasing the Reynolds.
Mirdef Ali Al-Qashouti, acting charge d’affaires at the Qatar Embassy in Kabul, told Lynch that Qatari officials ensured the couple were kept in “comfortable” conditions during talks.
He told Lynch the Reynolds’ release was because of “continuous efforts by my government to keep our policy in helping releasing hostages and our mediation and diplomacy”.
“Throughout their eight months in detention – during which they were largely held separately – the Qatari embassy in Kabul provided them with critical support, including access to their doctor, delivery of medication, and regular communication with their family,” a Qatari official told Reuters news agency.
Hamish Falconer, minister for the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan, said in a statement: “The UK has worked intensively since their detention and has supported the family throughout.
“Qatar played an essential role in this case, for which I am hugely grateful.”
The couple have lived in Afghanistan for 18 years and run an organisation called Rebuild, which provides education and training programmes.
They have been together since the 1960s and married in the Afghan capital in 1970.
Their son, Jonathan, told Sky News in April his parents had “never heard one accusation or one charge”.
He said the British government had offered to evacuate them when the Taliban took over, to which they replied: “Why would we leave these people in their darkest hour?”
Mr and Mrs Reynolds are now on their way home, where they will be reunited with their family.
Donald Trump has told Sir Keir Starmer he should use the military to stop migrants crossing the Channel.
The US president made the suggestion while stood alongside the prime minister for a typically wide-ranging news conference on Thursday afternoon, bringing his state visit to Britain to an end.
Speaking at Chequers, Sir Keir‘s country retreat, Mr Trump warned illegal migration is “going to destroy […] countries from within” and said “it doesn’t matter if you call out the military” to deal with small boats.
He talked up his own record of stopping people crossing the US-Mexico border.
Sir Keir instead pointed to his government’s migrant return deal with France, with the first deportation of a man who arrived via small boat taking place on Thursday morning.
Further flights are scheduled to take place this week and next, starting Friday, while exchange arrivals to Britain via the legal route agreed with the French are due in the coming days.
It’s the “biggest disappointment” of his presidency that he hasn’t managed to end the war, Mr Trump admitted.
He said he thought it would be the “easiest” to solve because of his relationship with Mr Putin.
Sir Keir said the Russian president has “shown his true face”, and more “pressure” is required to make him stop.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:11
Rigby to Trump: Was Putin’s Alaska invite a mistake?
Trump reignites war of words with Khan
While disappointed with Mr Putin, Mr Trump spared his harshest rhetoric for Sir Keir’s friend Sadiq Khan.
Speaking on Air Force One on his way back to the US, where he touched down in the early hours of Friday, he said he asked for the London mayor to be banned from attending the state banquet at Windsor Castle on Wednesday.
“I didn’t want him there,” the president said. “I asked that he not be there.”
He claimed Sir Sadiq had wanted to be at the event, adding: “I think the mayor of London Khan is among the worst mayors in the world, and we have some bad ones.”
Sky News understands the mayor didn’t seek or expect an invitation. A source close to Sir Sadiq said the capital is a “global success story” and “record numbers of Americans are choosing to make London their home”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:57
Will both sides be happy with Trump’s state visit?
The Trump-Starmer news conference also covered the war in Gaza, the sacking of Lord Mandelson as Britain’s US ambassador, energy policy, and a newly signed UK-US tech deal.
Speaking about the situation in Gaza, Mr Trump said: “Simply I want all hostages to be released now.”
He said he disagreed with the UK’s plan to recognise a Palestinian state at the UN within days, should Israel not improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza.
Trump claims not to know Mandelson
Also asked by Beth Rigby if he has sympathy with Lord Mandelson, who was sacked by Sir Keir over past links to paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, the president simply said: “I don’t know him.”
That’s despite the president being pictured shaking hands with the Labour peer in the Oval Office after announcing a trade deal with the UK back in May.
There had been concerns that the Epstein issue could cast a shadow on the president’s second state visit to the UK, not least because Mr Trump was also close to Epstein, although they fell out before his conviction in 2009.
Image: Lord Mandelson pictured with President Trump in the Oval Office in May. Pic: Reuters
Image: Pic: AP
Energy policy
Mr Trump urged Sir Keir to exploit the UK’s North Sea oil and gas resources, dismissing wind power as a “very expensive joke”.
The UK government has ruled out new oil and gas licences in the North Sea, focusing on renewables and building nuclear power stations.
Despite their differences, Mr Trump said the bond between the US and Britain is like no other, and he described the prime minister as a “tough negotiator”.
The pair signed a technology prosperity deal, offering major investment by US tech firms in the UK, that will help to develop artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities.
Sir Keir also hailed the prospect of £150bn flowing into the UK from big US companies such as Palantir and Blackstone, part of a wider £250bn package that officials say will benefit both sides.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:27
Kimmel was ‘fired for bad ratings’, says US president
Jimmy Kimmel controversy
Meanwhile, Mr Trump also commented on US late-night chat show host Jimmy Kimmel, whose programme has been pulled from schedules after his remarks about the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
The president claimed the show, Jimmy Kimmel Live!, was suspended because he “is not a talented person” and had “very bad ratings”.
Two of the most important Labour-affiliated unions are set to nominate their choice for who should replace Angela Rayner as the party’s deputy leader.
Unison and GMB will pick their candidate on 25 September – two days ahead of the deadline for nominations for Labour affiliates and local party branches.
Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, is seen as the government’s choice of candidate in the race, which has effectively turned into a de facto confidence vote on Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership.
She is up against Lucy Powell, who was sacked as Commons leader in the recent reshuffle and has become the candidate for MPs who are unhappy with the party’s direction after a difficult first year in government.
Ms Phillipson has already secured the backing of the two unions – Community and the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers.
Will unions want to say ‘sod you’ to PM?
There are question marks over who Unison, GMB and Unite will back in the race, triggered by Ms Rayner quitting as deputy leader, deputy prime minister and housing secretary over underpaid stamp duty on a second home.
While Ms Phillipson may be boosted by having the backing of Number 10, the level of discontent in the Labour Party and wider union movement is at such a level that Ms Powell’s “outsider” status may benefit her.
One union source told Sky News that while they felt Ms Phillipson was the “better candidate”, “the temptation to vote Lucy to give a ‘sod you’ to government is a lot”.
They added: “Number 10 need to start fearing the party. They’ve had it too easy.”
Another union insider said there was a “sense among union leaders that they wish this wasn’t happening”.
They questioned how important a role the unions would play in this contest due to the tight timetable, making it harder for them to mobilise behind a candidate.
“Most unions feel this is not a hugely impactful moment either way,” they said.
“Many of their members will be feeling quite grumpy at how things are going with the government, but at the same time, union leaders won’t want to get on the wrong side of Number 10 over something that is not going to make a meaningful difference in the long term.”
There are questions over the extent of Unite’s involvement and interest in the race.
Although the union is Labour’s biggest supporter, Sharon Graham, its general secretary, has sought to turn its focus away from internal party politics and on to industrial disputes.
On the first day of the Trades Union Congress in Brighton, she told Sky News she’d be “looking very much at their track record – have they backed workers? That’s what I’ll be looking for”.
Image: Sharon Graham said she’ll be looking at which candidate has backed workers
How will the race play out?
In order to proceed to the next stage of the contest, the two candidates must each secure nominations from at least 5% of constituency Labour parties, or at least three organisations affiliated that to the party. At least two of these must be trade unions which make up 5% of fully paid-up affiliated party members.
The deadline to secure the necessary support is Saturday 27 September.
The Labour Party’s annual conference begins the next day, where the candidates who have secured the required backing will be able to make their pitches directly to members in a final hustings.
Ms Phillipson, who has spoken of growing up in a working class area of Sunderland before going on to high office, said she was the person to take on Reform and secure a second term for Labour.
Speaking at a hustings event last week, she told members: “You can use this contest to look backward, to pass judgment on what has happened in the last year, or you can use it to shape positively what happens in the run-up to the next election.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:30
Bridget Phillipson to stand for Labour deputy leader
‘Unforced errors’ cost government
Her message comes in contrast to that of Ms Powell, who has pitched herself as the “shop steward” of the parliamentary party willing to deliver criticism to the prime minister if necessary.
She said Labour’s mistakes in office over welfare and winter fuel payments had given the impression that it is “not on the side of ordinary people”.
In an interview with the BBC, Ms Powell praised the government’s “many achievements”, but added: “Some of the mistakes that we’ve made, or some of the unforced errors, have given a sense that we’re not on the side of ordinary people.”
Although Ms Powell secured fewer nominations from MPs than Ms Phillipson, recent polling by Survation suggests she is ahead with members on 47%, compared with 30% for her rival.