Trying to understand Nicola Peltz Beckham

[Anonymous]

Yet he still seems to want to use the Beckham brand and all the priviledges and followers that brought him to his advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think all celebs have their names (and probably kids names) trademarked. It it to protect them.

I don't know enough about branding or contracts related to name trademarks to have any idea what really happened but given how overdramatized and exaggerated the 'first dance' and ' 11th hour wedding dress' stories are I don't doubt this is more of the same.

I am sure David and Victoria were controlling - they are major public figures. But he didn't exactly strike out on his own. He just jumped into a different rich and famous family with controlling people who have a well documented history of treating others poorly.

Yes, when they were children. Brooklyn wasn’t a child when he married so there was no need to continue to own the trademark for his name.

As many others have said, he’s never really done anything. All of his attempts have petered out.

It sounds like from the article, it wasn't specifically about who owned the trademark. It was about contracts and Brooklyn refused to sign on. Sounds like he already had control. According to the article, the trademark was for ten years and expires in Dec 2026.

Oh even better. He doesn’t need to be part of the family contracts if he doesn’t want to.

No he doesn't and he chose not to. This according to Brooklyn upset D and V as it would have been a better, more lucrative contract if all the kids signed on. Which is fine. They can be disappointed. But to still be moaning about it...let it go. He is 27. He has been an adult for 9 years. Time to grow up.

It seems he's the one moaning with his instagram screed. About his wife's wedding dress? Time to grow up, indeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess Victoria owns the trademark to "Brooklyn Beckham" (and all her kids), and it was due to expire. It doesn't sound quite so nefarious,

"Brand and Culture expert Nick Ede added: 'Situations like this are far more common than people realise in high-profile families but they’re usually handled privately, not in the public eye or as explosively as this one

'The Beckham brand has always been both a family and a business. When a name becomes a global commercial asset, legal protections and trademarks are often put in place early on to safeguard future opportunities and avoid third-party exploitation.

Where this becomes emotionally charged is timing and perception. If a conversation around contracts or trademarks happens during a deeply personal moment like a wedding, it can understandably feel overwhelming or misinterpreted particularly if different advisers are giving different interpretations.

'What may be intended as protection can feel like pressure when trust and communication break down which this certainly feels like it is.

'It’s also important to stress that trademark ownership doesn’t equal control over someone’s life or identity it’s about commercial usage in specific categories. These arrangements are usually designed to future-proof the family rather than restrict individual freedom."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15479661/trademark-row-Beckham-feud-Victoria-Brooklyn.html

So the person on the previous page was most likely right. She wanted to be a Kris Jenner and make a nepo baby empire for her kids. She must have been trying to get him to sign an agreement that she can still have the rights and he won't apply for it himself before the wedding.

I don't see any similarities. Kris had nothing of her own before she started making money through her kids. The Beckhams built an empire on their own and probably want to protect it- in part for their kids inheritance, including Brooklyn. Brooklyn and Nicola have no clue what goes into building a business.

Btw the Peltz are hard core MAGA.

Who cares? Does that mean the Beckhams should hold the trademark and family contract over his head? He doesn't want to be part of it. Thats what happens when your kid grow up and decide to do other things.

It makes a lot of difference to the post I was replying to. They aren't trying to exploit him or use him for money. That's completely different than the motivations of a Kris Jenner.

He married into a shady family- the Beckhams aren't perfect, but the Peltz have made some very questionable decisions. I would be concerned if it was my son too, but I would probably also reflect back and seriously wonder what I as a parent did for the family to get to this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess Victoria owns the trademark to "Brooklyn Beckham" (and all her kids), and it was due to expire. It doesn't sound quite so nefarious,

"Brand and Culture expert Nick Ede added: 'Situations like this are far more common than people realise in high-profile families but they’re usually handled privately, not in the public eye or as explosively as this one

'The Beckham brand has always been both a family and a business. When a name becomes a global commercial asset, legal protections and trademarks are often put in place early on to safeguard future opportunities and avoid third-party exploitation.

Where this becomes emotionally charged is timing and perception. If a conversation around contracts or trademarks happens during a deeply personal moment like a wedding, it can understandably feel overwhelming or misinterpreted particularly if different advisers are giving different interpretations.

'What may be intended as protection can feel like pressure when trust and communication break down which this certainly feels like it is.

'It’s also important to stress that trademark ownership doesn’t equal control over someone’s life or identity it’s about commercial usage in specific categories. These arrangements are usually designed to future-proof the family rather than restrict individual freedom."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15479661/trademark-row-Beckham-feud-Victoria-Brooklyn.html

So the person on the previous page was most likely right. She wanted to be a Kris Jenner and make a nepo baby empire for her kids. She must have been trying to get him to sign an agreement that she can still have the rights and he won't apply for it himself before the wedding.

I don't see any similarities. Kris had nothing of her own before she started making money through her kids. The Beckhams built an empire on their own and probably want to protect it- in part for their kids inheritance, including Brooklyn. Brooklyn and Nicola have no clue what goes into building a business.

Btw the Peltz are hard core MAGA.

Who cares? Does that mean the Beckhams should hold the trademark and family contract over his head? He doesn't want to be part of it. Thats what happens when your kid grow up and decide to do other things.

But he wants to piggyback on the success they created with the family name for himself. Nobody is stopping him from "deciding to do other things" but destroy the family name can't be one of them. He can go play with the Peltz name and money all he wants, if his in-laws would allow it. That probably won't last very long either.

It's his name too. He didn't ask to be born. If he doesn't want to participate in their family contracts and trademarks then its his right. If he wants to go off and ruin HIS name then that is his free will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess Victoria owns the trademark to "Brooklyn Beckham" (and all her kids), and it was due to expire. It doesn't sound quite so nefarious,

"Brand and Culture expert Nick Ede added: 'Situations like this are far more common than people realise in high-profile families but they’re usually handled privately, not in the public eye or as explosively as this one

'The Beckham brand has always been both a family and a business. When a name becomes a global commercial asset, legal protections and trademarks are often put in place early on to safeguard future opportunities and avoid third-party exploitation.

Where this becomes emotionally charged is timing and perception. If a conversation around contracts or trademarks happens during a deeply personal moment like a wedding, it can understandably feel overwhelming or misinterpreted particularly if different advisers are giving different interpretations.

'What may be intended as protection can feel like pressure when trust and communication break down which this certainly feels like it is.

'It’s also important to stress that trademark ownership doesn’t equal control over someone’s life or identity it’s about commercial usage in specific categories. These arrangements are usually designed to future-proof the family rather than restrict individual freedom."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15479661/trademark-row-Beckham-feud-Victoria-Brooklyn.html

So the person on the previous page was most likely right. She wanted to be a Kris Jenner and make a nepo baby empire for her kids. She must have been trying to get him to sign an agreement that she can still have the rights and he won't apply for it himself before the wedding.

I don't see any similarities. Kris had nothing of her own before she started making money through her kids. The Beckhams built an empire on their own and probably want to protect it- in part for their kids inheritance, including Brooklyn. Brooklyn and Nicola have no clue what goes into building a business.

Btw the Peltz are hard core MAGA.

Who cares? Does that mean the Beckhams should hold the trademark and family contract over his head? He doesn't want to be part of it. Thats what happens when your kid grow up and decide to do other things.

But he wants to piggyback on the success they created with the family name for himself. Nobody is stopping him from "deciding to do other things" but destroy the family name can't be one of them. He can go play with the Peltz name and money all he wants, if his in-laws would allow it. That probably won't last very long either.

Agree and when it's over, the Peltz will rake him across the coals. He better pray he works this out with his parents and gets his own inheritance in line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess Victoria owns the trademark to "Brooklyn Beckham" (and all her kids), and it was due to expire. It doesn't sound quite so nefarious,

"Brand and Culture expert Nick Ede added: 'Situations like this are far more common than people realise in high-profile families but they’re usually handled privately, not in the public eye or as explosively as this one

'The Beckham brand has always been both a family and a business. When a name becomes a global commercial asset, legal protections and trademarks are often put in place early on to safeguard future opportunities and avoid third-party exploitation.

Where this becomes emotionally charged is timing and perception. If a conversation around contracts or trademarks happens during a deeply personal moment like a wedding, it can understandably feel overwhelming or misinterpreted particularly if different advisers are giving different interpretations.

'What may be intended as protection can feel like pressure when trust and communication break down which this certainly feels like it is.

'It’s also important to stress that trademark ownership doesn’t equal control over someone’s life or identity it’s about commercial usage in specific categories. These arrangements are usually designed to future-proof the family rather than restrict individual freedom."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15479661/trademark-row-Beckham-feud-Victoria-Brooklyn.html

So the person on the previous page was most likely right. She wanted to be a Kris Jenner and make a nepo baby empire for her kids. She must have been trying to get him to sign an agreement that she can still have the rights and he won't apply for it himself before the wedding.

I don't see any similarities. Kris had nothing of her own before she started making money through her kids. The Beckhams built an empire on their own and probably want to protect it- in part for their kids inheritance, including Brooklyn. Brooklyn and Nicola have no clue what goes into building a business.

Btw the Peltz are hard core MAGA.

Who cares? Does that mean the Beckhams should hold the trademark and family contract over his head? He doesn't want to be part of it. Thats what happens when your kid grow up and decide to do other things.

It makes a lot of difference to the post I was replying to. They aren't trying to exploit him or use him for money. That's completely different than the motivations of a Kris Jenner.

He married into a shady family- the Beckhams aren't perfect, but the Peltz have made some very questionable decisions. I would be concerned if it was my son too, but I would probably also reflect back and seriously wonder what I as a parent did for the family to get to this point.

+1 I don't think the posters here know a thing about Nelson Peltz and the causes he funds and supports. He is very off brand for this site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think all celebs have their names (and probably kids names) trademarked. It it to protect them.

I don't know enough about branding or contracts related to name trademarks to have any idea what really happened but given how overdramatized and exaggerated the 'first dance' and ' 11th hour wedding dress' stories are I don't doubt this is more of the same.

I am sure David and Victoria were controlling - they are major public figures. But he didn't exactly strike out on his own. He just jumped into a different rich and famous family with controlling people who have a well documented history of treating others poorly.

Yes, when they were children. Brooklyn wasn’t a child when he married so there was no need to continue to own the trademark for his name.

As many others have said, he’s never really done anything. All of his attempts have petered out.

It sounds like from the article, it wasn't specifically about who owned the trademark. It was about contracts and Brooklyn refused to sign on. Sounds like he already had control. According to the article, the trademark was for ten years and expires in Dec 2026.

Oh even better. He doesn’t need to be part of the family contracts if he doesn’t want to.

No he doesn't and he chose not to. This according to Brooklyn upset D and V as it would have been a better, more lucrative contract if all the kids signed on. Which is fine. They can be disappointed. But to still be moaning about it...let it go. He is 27. He has been an adult for 9 years. Time to grow up.

Its really the lost of control they're mad about. Having a family brand is fine only if you realize your kids are not extensions of you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess Victoria owns the trademark to "Brooklyn Beckham" (and all her kids), and it was due to expire. It doesn't sound quite so nefarious,

"Brand and Culture expert Nick Ede added: 'Situations like this are far more common than people realise in high-profile families but they’re usually handled privately, not in the public eye or as explosively as this one

'The Beckham brand has always been both a family and a business. When a name becomes a global commercial asset, legal protections and trademarks are often put in place early on to safeguard future opportunities and avoid third-party exploitation.

Where this becomes emotionally charged is timing and perception. If a conversation around contracts or trademarks happens during a deeply personal moment like a wedding, it can understandably feel overwhelming or misinterpreted particularly if different advisers are giving different interpretations.

'What may be intended as protection can feel like pressure when trust and communication break down which this certainly feels like it is.

'It’s also important to stress that trademark ownership doesn’t equal control over someone’s life or identity it’s about commercial usage in specific categories. These arrangements are usually designed to future-proof the family rather than restrict individual freedom."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15479661/trademark-row-Beckham-feud-Victoria-Brooklyn.html

So the person on the previous page was most likely right. She wanted to be a Kris Jenner and make a nepo baby empire for her kids. She must have been trying to get him to sign an agreement that she can still have the rights and he won't apply for it himself before the wedding.

I don't see any similarities. Kris had nothing of her own before she started making money through her kids. The Beckhams built an empire on their own and probably want to protect it- in part for their kids inheritance, including Brooklyn. Brooklyn and Nicola have no clue what goes into building a business.

Btw the Peltz are hard core MAGA.

Who cares? Does that mean the Beckhams should hold the trademark and family contract over his head? He doesn't want to be part of it. Thats what happens when your kid grow up and decide to do other things.

It makes a lot of difference to the post I was replying to. They aren't trying to exploit him or use him for money. That's completely different than the motivations of a Kris Jenner.

He married into a shady family- the Beckhams aren't perfect, but the Peltz have made some very questionable decisions. I would be concerned if it was my son too, but I would probably also reflect back and seriously wonder what I as a parent did for the family to get to this point.

+1 I don't think the posters here know a thing about Nelson Peltz and the causes he funds and supports. He is very off brand for this site.

I dont care if he funded Greenland being taken. Brooklyn should have his name trademark freely and shouldn't have to be gulited in signing with the rest of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess Victoria owns the trademark to "Brooklyn Beckham" (and all her kids), and it was due to expire. It doesn't sound quite so nefarious,

"Brand and Culture expert Nick Ede added: 'Situations like this are far more common than people realise in high-profile families but they’re usually handled privately, not in the public eye or as explosively as this one

'The Beckham brand has always been both a family and a business. When a name becomes a global commercial asset, legal protections and trademarks are often put in place early on to safeguard future opportunities and avoid third-party exploitation.

Where this becomes emotionally charged is timing and perception. If a conversation around contracts or trademarks happens during a deeply personal moment like a wedding, it can understandably feel overwhelming or misinterpreted particularly if different advisers are giving different interpretations.

'What may be intended as protection can feel like pressure when trust and communication break down which this certainly feels like it is.

'It’s also important to stress that trademark ownership doesn’t equal control over someone’s life or identity it’s about commercial usage in specific categories. These arrangements are usually designed to future-proof the family rather than restrict individual freedom."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15479661/trademark-row-Beckham-feud-Victoria-Brooklyn.html

So the person on the previous page was most likely right. She wanted to be a Kris Jenner and make a nepo baby empire for her kids. She must have been trying to get him to sign an agreement that she can still have the rights and he won't apply for it himself before the wedding.

I don't see any similarities. Kris had nothing of her own before she started making money through her kids. The Beckhams built an empire on their own and probably want to protect it- in part for their kids inheritance, including Brooklyn. Brooklyn and Nicola have no clue what goes into building a business.

Btw the Peltz are hard core MAGA.

Who cares? Does that mean the Beckhams should hold the trademark and family contract over his head? He doesn't want to be part of it. Thats what happens when your kid grow up and decide to do other things.

But he wants to piggyback on the success they created with the family name for himself. Nobody is stopping him from "deciding to do other things" but destroy the family name can't be one of them. He can go play with the Peltz name and money all he wants, if his in-laws would allow it. That probably won't last very long either.

He can use his name as he wishes, including destroying it. Again, if the parents wanted to control a brand name in perpetuity then they should have used a different name then their last name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess Victoria owns the trademark to "Brooklyn Beckham" (and all her kids), and it was due to expire. It doesn't sound quite so nefarious,

"Brand and Culture expert Nick Ede added: 'Situations like this are far more common than people realise in high-profile families but they’re usually handled privately, not in the public eye or as explosively as this one

'The Beckham brand has always been both a family and a business. When a name becomes a global commercial asset, legal protections and trademarks are often put in place early on to safeguard future opportunities and avoid third-party exploitation.

Where this becomes emotionally charged is timing and perception. If a conversation around contracts or trademarks happens during a deeply personal moment like a wedding, it can understandably feel overwhelming or misinterpreted particularly if different advisers are giving different interpretations.

'What may be intended as protection can feel like pressure when trust and communication break down which this certainly feels like it is.

'It’s also important to stress that trademark ownership doesn’t equal control over someone’s life or identity it’s about commercial usage in specific categories. These arrangements are usually designed to future-proof the family rather than restrict individual freedom."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15479661/trademark-row-Beckham-feud-Victoria-Brooklyn.html

So the person on the previous page was most likely right. She wanted to be a Kris Jenner and make a nepo baby empire for her kids. She must have been trying to get him to sign an agreement that she can still have the rights and he won't apply for it himself before the wedding.

I don't see any similarities. Kris had nothing of her own before she started making money through her kids. The Beckhams built an empire on their own and probably want to protect it- in part for their kids inheritance, including Brooklyn. Brooklyn and Nicola have no clue what goes into building a business.

Btw the Peltz are hard core MAGA.

Who cares? Does that mean the Beckhams should hold the trademark and family contract over his head? He doesn't want to be part of it. Thats what happens when your kid grow up and decide to do other things.

It makes a lot of difference to the post I was replying to. They aren't trying to exploit him or use him for money. That's completely different than the motivations of a Kris Jenner.

He married into a shady family- the Beckhams aren't perfect, but the Peltz have made some very questionable decisions. I would be concerned if it was my son too, but I would probably also reflect back and seriously wonder what I as a parent did for the family to get to this point.

+1 I don't think the posters here know a thing about Nelson Peltz and the causes he funds and supports. He is very off brand for this site.

I dont care if he funded Greenland being taken. Brooklyn should have his name trademark freely and shouldn't have to be gulited in signing with the rest of them.

That's really the least problematic thing in all of this. Brooklyn should just grow up and make his own way in this world without biting the hand that feeds him. This is why people think he's ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yet he still seems to want to use the Beckham brand and all the priviledges and followers that brought him to his advantage.

How is he using their brand?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess Victoria owns the trademark to "Brooklyn Beckham" (and all her kids), and it was due to expire. It doesn't sound quite so nefarious,

"Brand and Culture expert Nick Ede added: 'Situations like this are far more common than people realise in high-profile families but they’re usually handled privately, not in the public eye or as explosively as this one

'The Beckham brand has always been both a family and a business. When a name becomes a global commercial asset, legal protections and trademarks are often put in place early on to safeguard future opportunities and avoid third-party exploitation.

Where this becomes emotionally charged is timing and perception. If a conversation around contracts or trademarks happens during a deeply personal moment like a wedding, it can understandably feel overwhelming or misinterpreted particularly if different advisers are giving different interpretations.

'What may be intended as protection can feel like pressure when trust and communication break down which this certainly feels like it is.

'It’s also important to stress that trademark ownership doesn’t equal control over someone’s life or identity it’s about commercial usage in specific categories. These arrangements are usually designed to future-proof the family rather than restrict individual freedom."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15479661/trademark-row-Beckham-feud-Victoria-Brooklyn.html

So the person on the previous page was most likely right. She wanted to be a Kris Jenner and make a nepo baby empire for her kids. She must have been trying to get him to sign an agreement that she can still have the rights and he won't apply for it himself before the wedding.

I don't see any similarities. Kris had nothing of her own before she started making money through her kids. The Beckhams built an empire on their own and probably want to protect it- in part for their kids inheritance, including Brooklyn. Brooklyn and Nicola have no clue what goes into building a business.

Btw the Peltz are hard core MAGA.

Who cares? Does that mean the Beckhams should hold the trademark and family contract over his head? He doesn't want to be part of it. Thats what happens when your kid grow up and decide to do other things.

But he wants to piggyback on the success they created with the family name for himself. Nobody is stopping him from "deciding to do other things" but destroy the family name can't be one of them. He can go play with the Peltz name and money all he wants, if his in-laws would allow it. That probably won't last very long either.

He can use his name as he wishes, including destroying it. Again, if the parents wanted to control a brand name in perpetuity then they should have used a different name then their last name.

Just wait until the lawsuits start. He has no clue. You can't just do whatever you want with "your name".

https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2025/09/brooklyn-beckham-resolves-trademark-spat-with-becks-beer/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess Victoria owns the trademark to "Brooklyn Beckham" (and all her kids), and it was due to expire. It doesn't sound quite so nefarious,

"Brand and Culture expert Nick Ede added: 'Situations like this are far more common than people realise in high-profile families but they’re usually handled privately, not in the public eye or as explosively as this one

'The Beckham brand has always been both a family and a business. When a name becomes a global commercial asset, legal protections and trademarks are often put in place early on to safeguard future opportunities and avoid third-party exploitation.

Where this becomes emotionally charged is timing and perception. If a conversation around contracts or trademarks happens during a deeply personal moment like a wedding, it can understandably feel overwhelming or misinterpreted particularly if different advisers are giving different interpretations.

'What may be intended as protection can feel like pressure when trust and communication break down which this certainly feels like it is.

'It’s also important to stress that trademark ownership doesn’t equal control over someone’s life or identity it’s about commercial usage in specific categories. These arrangements are usually designed to future-proof the family rather than restrict individual freedom."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15479661/trademark-row-Beckham-feud-Victoria-Brooklyn.html

So the person on the previous page was most likely right. She wanted to be a Kris Jenner and make a nepo baby empire for her kids. She must have been trying to get him to sign an agreement that she can still have the rights and he won't apply for it himself before the wedding.

I don't see any similarities. Kris had nothing of her own before she started making money through her kids. The Beckhams built an empire on their own and probably want to protect it- in part for their kids inheritance, including Brooklyn. Brooklyn and Nicola have no clue what goes into building a business.

Btw the Peltz are hard core MAGA.

Who cares? Does that mean the Beckhams should hold the trademark and family contract over his head? He doesn't want to be part of it. Thats what happens when your kid grow up and decide to do other things.

It makes a lot of difference to the post I was replying to. They aren't trying to exploit him or use him for money. That's completely different than the motivations of a Kris Jenner.

He married into a shady family- the Beckhams aren't perfect, but the Peltz have made some very questionable decisions. I would be concerned if it was my son too, but I would probably also reflect back and seriously wonder what I as a parent did for the family to get to this point.

Leaking negative stories to the press about your kid is a great way to express concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet he still seems to want to use the Beckham brand and all the priviledges and followers that brought him to his advantage.

How is he using their brand?

He has 16 million followers on IG. I would say 99.9% of that is due to being part of the Beckham brand. They aren't joining for the cooking tips.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a Page Six source has it exactly right:

Another insider said that “two things can be true,” pointing out the situation has become intolerable because Peltz can be “crazy” and wants her own way, while Victoria can be “dreadful” — and Brooklyn was stuck in the middle.

Thats what it comes down to most of the time. If neither wants to be cordial then Brooklyn had to choose.

Obviously Brooklyn would choose his wife. Victoria gravely miscalculated.

+1 If the Beckhams are so obsessed with their "brand," being rotten to their DIL doesn't help much (as they've no doubt realized by Brooklyn's tirade.) Maybe Nicola is awful, who knows, but she's equally rich and willing to marry their son who isn't particularly accomplished. Not sure what there is to gain by trying to kill off that relationship. The wedding stories make Victoria sound pretty awful--any normal MIL would redirect the attention to the bride where it belongs.