It has to do with facebook, and a derogatory page about her. Thing is, she trolled us using two different accounts with her name on them, using racial and homophobic slurs, which she would then remove, unaware we screen-capped them. The profiles were linked to her website and allegedly verified by facebook. Fake pages bearing her likeness claiming to be her got removed immediately by her management...these other pages, which they knew well about, were up for over a year. Now 'her people' are claiming those were fake (which I think burden of proof is on them, and that they would need to prove we "knew" they were fake, which, we thought they were her, and sounded like her), and they have also accused us of having photoshopped those posts, which we didn't. After her remarks came to light, she fell back on an old stand by---"I was hacked". She does it every time her online habits get her in trouble. Again, I think burden of proof is on them. They've made claims of 'positions' she's gained, such as 'spokesperson for x organization', and we've received e-mails from those organizations she certainly was NOT, that she is just calling herself that. Her mother/manager is known for telling whoppers and not being able to tell the truth, which I think would also be detrimental in court for them. Speculation has taken place on our parts, but no more so than any 'real' celebrity. If her attorney is claiming she is trademarked and we may not speak about her, then claiming she's NOT a public figure, I don't think she has her head together, and again, a certain amount of burden of proof is on them. Oh, and yes, the trademark is for real. What it is, is they think they can censor the public, because 99% of those who know who she is, don't like her, and they're trying to keep people from talking bad about her. You can't only allow those who 'love' her to speak about her, you can't allow tabloids to print your photo and stories about you, then complain some 'hater' mentioned your name and violated your trademark.
Asker, that's pointless babbling on like that. We are not here to wade through that, to be your crying towel, or to give that kind of detail. For that you need to hire a lawyer and pay a fee. Avvo is for finding a lawyer and the answers are to help you choose. Avvo is not where you go to avoid paying an attorney when you need one.
And, Asker for what it's worth it is not a trademark issue you are facing it is a defamation claim or a SLAPP suit.