November 22nd 2024.
Katy Perry, the renowned international pop sensation, has achieved a major victory in her ongoing legal battle over trademark rights with an Australian fashion designer. This dispute, which has been ongoing since Perry's Prism tour a decade ago, has finally reached a resolution in the singer's favor.
Born as Katheryn Hudson, Perry successfully appealed the 2023 Federal Court's ruling that her company Kitty Purry was guilty of trademark infringement during her 2014 tour in Australia. The lawsuit was filed by fashion designer Katie Jane Taylor in October 2019, more than 10 years after Perry began selling merchandise, including clothing, under her own name.
Interestingly, Taylor had been selling her own clothing line under the label Katie Perry since 2007, inspired by her trip to Italy. However, three appeal judges unanimously overturned Justice Brigitte Markovic's findings and ordered that Taylor's trademark be deregistered. They described the case as unfortunate, where two enterprising women in different countries had adopted their names as trademarks.
The judges acknowledged the hard work and dedication put in by both women to build their businesses. They noted that Perry had been using her name as a trademark in good faith since five years before Taylor launched her own business. The court also found that the pop singer's name was used honestly on all merchandise sold in Australia.
The legal battle began in May 2009 when Perry's talent agent Steven Jensen was informed of Taylor's application to register the Katie Perry trademark. In an email, the superstar had instructed him to not involve her in the matter, stating that she wouldn't have bothered if the media hadn't picked up on the "silliness." She even jokingly called Taylor a "dumb bitch" in her email, signed off with her signature "Rawr!"
The judges found that Taylor had applied for the trademark despite being aware of the singer's reputation. They also ruled that it was deceptively similar to the Katy Perry brand and could potentially confuse consumers. While die-hard fans may have noticed the slight spelling differences, the average consumer may have been misled into thinking that the local designer's clothing was associated with the American pop star.
In a statement, Taylor expressed her devastation and heartbreak over the decision and stated that this case proves that a trademark is not worth the paper it's printed on. She had been dreaming of launching her fashion label since she was just 11 years old and had worked hard since 2006 to make it a reality. However, with this ruling, her dream has been taken away.
On the other hand, Perry's lawyers declined to comment on the matter. The singer will be touring Australia for the first time in six years this June, after making a brief visit in September to perform at the AFL grand final. It remains to be seen what further actions Taylor and her legal team will take in response to the judgment.
[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
[Generative AI is experimental.]
