On November 4, 2025, Sasha Suda, the director of the Philadelphia Art Museum (the “Museum”), was removed from her position following a controversial and surprising rebranding of the Philadelphia Museum of Art to the Philadelphia Art Museum. The Museum’s $250,000 rebrand is presumed to be the principal reason for her removal, as its board reportedly was caught unaware when the rebrand debuted. The rebrand included a new logo, which was criticized as inappropriate for a museum, and the addition of the tagline “Wall to Wall, Art for All.” The rebrand ostensibly was aimed at increasing visitors by making the institution more welcoming. Although the rebrand was criticized, the backlash against Suda centered on the lack of transparency about it.

In February, 2026 the Museum abandoned the new name, while retaining aspects of the logo. Daniel Weiss, who succeeded Suda as director of the Museum, explained the change:

An essential part of brand stewardship is innovating, and also listening. The new logo, with the griffin, is a bold, yet historical approach that we are heartened to see is being embraced by the public. Returning to the name that is beloved by staff, trustees, and members is an important gesture.

As recognized by Weiss, rebranding, whether a refresh or complete redo, precipitated by trademark, other legal issues or new market conditions, when executed appropriately, creates unique opportunities to hear from customers and donors. This input is equally invaluable for multinational corporations and small local nonprofit organizations. Transparency is essential as it helps avoid backlash and misalignment. Every detail of consumer perceptions from the company’s legacy and new audiences to the cultural context of the change should be considered. For example, the Museum engaged a New York-based firm for the rebranding, a decision that was criticized on the basis that a Philadelphia-based firm would have a better appreciation of the market, the history of the Museum and its place in the Philadelphia community.

Applying best practices and considering all consumer perceptions during the rebranding process can positively impact an organization’s reputation, extending well beyond a refreshed name and logo. A successful rebrand can result in positive (and unpaid) media exposure and an increase to the bottom line.

There are many examples of rebrands gone awry because there was not enough focus on the company’s existing goodwill, i.e., the value a trademark has because of its reputation. In fact, the museum had to look no further than the Pennsylvania Ballet’s rebrand to the Philadelphia Ballet in the summer of 2021. This name change was poorly received and overlooked the brand’s long history and strong identity. The change also caused confusion about whether the two companies were linked, diminishing goodwill. Additionally, in recent months, Cracker Barrel rebranded to modernize its logo and décor. The changes were unpopular with consumers, who valued the brand for its nostalgia, and were also unsuccessful in attracting a broader and younger demographic of patrons. The company reverted to the old designs within days because management failed to respect what their customer base valued!

Lutzker & Lutzker can help guide you through the art of rebranding, including protecting your brand, trademark and goodwill. In addition to the firm’s legal guidance, Senior Counsel Carolyn Wimbly Martin also brings her prior experience as Co-founder and Principal of Giving Tree Group, a brand consulting group having represented clients ranging from the Sotheby’s Institute of Art – London and New York, Catholic Charities USA and the Telecommunication Industry Association, among others. For further reading from our website on the topics discussed here, see the following insights and IP Bits & Pieces®: Trademarks and Brand Protection, What’s in a Rename: Public Spaces, Hail to the … Washington Football Team?, and our Trademark FAQs.