THE BIG STORY: More than perhaps any other artist in today’s music industry, Taylor Swift is a savvy businessperson – and like any CEO, she’s aware of the importance of legally protecting her brand.
Swift filed an action last week aimed at blocking a New York bedding company from getting a federal trademark registration on a logo featuring the name “Swift Home.” Arguing that it was confusingly similar to her own signature logo, Taylor’s lawyers warned that it could “deceive and mislead” people into thinking she had somehow endorsed the brand.
Related
“Consumers would immediately recognize the name “SWIFT” as identifying the Artist,” Taylor’s attorney, Rebecca Liebowitz of the law firm Venable LLP, wrote in the filing.
Such trademark opposition cases are a common tactic for big brands like Nike or Apple, aimed at preventing look-alike brands from securing their own trademark registrations. But major music stars like Jay-Z and Snoop Dogg also file them regularly to fend off copycats — like a case filed by Eminem last year against a Swim Shady brand of beach umbrellas.
For more on Taylor’s case – including access to the actual court documents she filed and how the case immediately had the intended effect – go read our full story here.
You’re reading The Legal Beat, a weekly newsletter about music law from Billboard Pro, offering you a one-stop cheat sheet of big new cases, important rulings and all the fun stuff in between. To get the newsletter in your inbox every Tuesday, subscribe here.
Other top stories this week…
-J. Cole filed his first response to Cam’ron’s lawsuit, denying that he ever promised to appear on Cam’s podcast and blasting him for going to court to “publicly disparage” him.
-The European Union granted approval to Universal Music Group’s $775 million acquisition of Downtown Music, following an antitrust probe sparked by concerns about market power and data security.
-Will A.I. music stay in “walled gardens” or be unleashed on streaming platforms? As Billboard‘s Kristin Robinson writes, that question is crucial in ongoing settlement talks between music majors and AI firms.
-A judge rejected allegations from Maverick City Music co-founder Tony Brown that the Grammy-winning worship collective strong-armed him into signing an bad buyout deal.
-John Mellencamp’s 1996 hit “Key West Intermezzo (I Saw You First)” didn’t rip off a little-known earlier song called “Coffee,” a judge ruled: “The songs do not sound anything alike.”
-A judge rejected Martin Shkreli’s attempt to sue the Wu-Tang Clan’s RZA over the group’s one-of-a-kind album Once Upon a Time in Shaolin, ruling that the maneuver was procedurally improper.
-The estate of MF Doom can move forward with reworked trademark case against Temu over counterfeit merch bearing the late hip-hop legend’s name and signature mask.
-Ye (formerly Kanye West) was sued again for allegedly using an unauthorized sample in his music, this time on the Vultures 2 track “530.” It’s hardly the first time.
