SugarMamma finfluencer Canna Campbell infringed trademark with financial foreplay podcast

Social media influencer and financial planner Canna Campbell breached a trademark with her podcast formerly called ‘SugarMamma’s Financial Foreplay’, a court has ruled.

Social media influencer Canna Campbell infringed on a Melbourne accountant’s trademark, a court has ruled.

Social media influencer Canna Campbell infringed on a Melbourne accountant’s trademark by using the words “financial foreplay” in her podcast, a court has ruled.

But Federal Circuit Court Judge Nicholas Manousaridis did not agree the Sydney-based “finfluencer” caused reputational damage to Rhondalynn Korolak by calling her podcast “SugarMamma’s Financial Foreplay” after Ms Korolak trademarked the phrase in 2017, and did not award her a cut of profits or damages.

The podcast is one example of content created by Ms Campbell, a licensed financial planner with a bachelor of commerce degree, under the successful brand marketed with the pseudonym SugarMamma.

Canna Campbell and Michael Thompson from the Nova podcast How Do they Afford That.

Since 2015, Ms Campbell has created YouTube, Instagram and TikTok accounts offering short videos with financial tips targeted at women and has published two books called the $1000 Project and Mindful Money.

Ms Campbell is currently the co-host of a Nova weekly podcast called “How Do They Afford That?”.

Ms Korolak launched her trademark infringement case against Ms Campbell in May 2021, arguing she has used the financial foreplay phrase for her business since 2009 aiming to “demystify finance and make complex financial concepts accessible to everyone”, including publishing a book called Financial Foreplay and registered a website with the same domain name.

IP Australia issued a certificate in 2017 for the phrase, also noting additional services linked with the trademark included financial advisory services and money management.

Ms Korolak asked the court to grant her damages and an amount of the profits she claimed Ms Campbell earned by using the financial foreplay phrase, worth about $555,000 from June 2020 to June 2022 according to Ms Korolak’s case.

As well, Ms Korolak argued she had a reputation in the use of the words “financial foreplay”, and that Ms Campbell’s use of those words was misleading.

Rhondalynn Korolak partly won a court fight over a trademark case involving finfluencer Canna Campbell. Picture: Stuart McEvoy

Justice Manousaridis concluded Ms Campbell did infringe on Ms Korolak’s trademark with her podcast that was later rebranded to SugarMamma’s Fireplay, but threw out other claims for a share in the finfluencer’s profits.

“I have concluded that … the respondents, in relation to those services have used the words, ‘Financial Foreplay’, being words that are identical with the Trade Mark, and the words ‘SugarMamma’s Financial Foreplay’, being words that are substantially identical to, or deceptively similar to the Trade Mark,” Justice Manousaridis said in his judgement.

“For these reasons, therefore, there has been an infringement of the Trade Mark,” he said.

But a claim for a cut of Ms Campbell’s profits — collected under her company SASS Financial Australia — were declined, Justice Manousaridis’s judgement read.

Further, he said he was “not satisfied” that Ms Campbell’s use of the words financial foreplay was misleading or deceptive.

“As the evidence makes clear, Ms Campbell promoted the FF Podcasts in the context of an established reputation Ms Campbell had already earned, largely through her extensive use of social media,” the judgement read.

Ms Korolak welcomed the judgement.

“Canna Campbell should have known that she did not have the right to use my intellectual property to promote her podcast,” she said.

“At the same time, she also leveraged her social media profile (which included the podcast) to benefit from commercial agreements with Klarna, ING Bank, Toyota, Officeworks, Athena Home Loans and other third parties.”

Ms Campbell has been contacted for comment.