Taylor Swift’s online merch operation for The Life of a Showgirl is coming under scrutiny in trademark litigation brought by a different “showgirl” in Las Vegas.
A week after suing Swift for infringing her “Confessions of a Showgirl” trademark, performer Maren Wade is now asking a court to bar the pop superstar from selling merch tied to her record-smashing latest album while the lawsuit plays out in court. The request comes in the form of a motion for an immediate injunction, filed on Tuesday (April 7) and obtained by Billboard.
Related
“‘Confessions of a Showgirl’ is not one mark among many for plaintiff. It is the only one she has,” reads Wade’s motion. “She has built her professional identity under it for more than a decade, and she has no portfolio of alternative brands, no corporate backing, and no global marketing operation to compete for consumer attention. Defendants have all of these.”
“If defendants’ use continues unchecked, the harm is not merely economic,” continued the motion. “It is the progressive erasure of plaintiff’s ability to be recognized as the source of her own brand.”
Wade has owned the trademark “Confessions of a Showgirl” since 2015 for her touring cabaret show about the escapades of a modern-day Las Vegas performer. Swift’s company TAS Rights Management sought to trademark The Life of a Showgirl upon the album’s announcement in August, but the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) preliminarily denied the application due to a likelihood of confusion with Wade’s existing mark.
According to Wade, this move from federal authorities should have made Swift’s team think twice about selling The Life of a Showgirl merch — especially since it has a robust intellectual property operation that appreciates the nuances of trademark law and regularly brings enforcement actions of its own.
But after Swift debuted The Life of a Showgirl with a record-breaking 4 million units in its first week, she continued to sell products ranging from candles to hairbrushes on a dedicated online storefront for the mega-successful album. As a result, Wade says, “the confusion the USPTO predicted has materialized.”
“Consumers refer to defendants’ album by plaintiff’s mark,” reads Tuesday’s motion. “They use plaintiff’s trademark as a hashtag for defendants’ products. Eight of ten Google autocomplete results for plaintiff’s exact registered mark now redirect to defendants, and that same search on YouTube returns nine consecutive hits for defendants before a single result for plaintiff. This is textbook reverse confusion.”
Wade argues that the injunction is necessary right now because the harm to her brand will only increase during the long process of resolving her litigation against Swift. She is solely bringing intellectual property claims as to Swift’s merch operations, not the actual songs on The Life of a Showgirl.
Wade’s attorney, Jaymie Parkkinen, told Billboard on Tuesday that the case is “a straightforward trademark matter.” He said they had hoped the issue would be resolved after the USPTO denied Swift’s trademark application.
“Instead, defendants continued using the mark without ever contacting us,” added Parkkinen. “When someone is told no by the federal government and keeps going anyway, litigation isn’t a choice — it’s the only option left. Trademark law provides for exactly this kind of relief in exactly this kind of situation. The system only works if it works for everyone.”
Swift’s reps have not commented on the lawsuit, and they did not immediately return an inquiry about the injunction request on Tuesday. The motion is tentatively set to be heard by a judge in Los Angeles federal court in late May.
