Australian designer wins trademark case against Katy Perry

In 2009, Katy Perry’s lawyers sent her a cease-and-desist letter for her brand.

“I had never heard of the singer when I started my label,” Taylor said that she had first heard of the singer in mid-2008 when her song  I Kissed a Girl had been playing on the radio.

“I was simply building a fashion business under the name I was born with,” she clarified. In 2019, Taylor sued and won against Perry in a claim that her sale of sweatpants, hoodies, jackets, and other items during a 2014 tour infringed her trademark.

In 2024, the ruling was overturned on appeal, with judges saying the singer had been using her name as a trademark five years earlier than when Taylor started her business.

In the most recent verdict, a decision was made on a 3:2 majority which said, “the heightened strength of the reputation of Katy Perry, no ordinary person in Australia, after a moment’s reflection, would think Katie Perry’s products were linked to the singer.”

The ruling also pointed out that Katy Perry’s eponymous label and her international merchandise distributor, Bravado, had been selling clothing in Australia despite their registrations excluding clothing items, and thus had directly infringed Taylor’s trademark.

After the decision had been made, both parties made statements. The singer’s spokesperson said, “Katy Perry has never sought to close down Ms. Taylor’s business or stop her from selling clothes under the Katie Perry label.”

“Today, by a 3:2 decision, the High Court determined that Ms. Taylor’s trademark can remain on the register” it said, continuing it read that the court had“sent the case back to the Full Federal Court to determine issues raised by Katy Perry, including Ms. Taylor’s 10-year delay in bringing her case.”

And in a statement issued by Taylor’s brand on their website, it said the decision showed that “even small Australian businesses” could stand up for their rights.

“This case has never just been about a name,” the statement said. “It has been about protecting small businesses in Australia, standing up for what’s right, and showing that we all matter.”

Taylor also appeared on A Current Affair, a prominent Australian news show. She said a big reason why she took Perry to court was to set an example for her children.

This is not the first time Katy Perry has made headlines for a lawsuit brought against her. In 2015, Perry attempted to purchase a former convent in Los Feliz, Los Angeles, for $14.5 million; however, two nuns, Sister Catherine Rose Holzman and Sister Rita Callanan, objected to the sale that had already been approved by the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.

Sister Holzman sadly died during a post-judgment court hearing. Following the incident and the backlash she faced over the case, Perry did not proceed with the property purchase.

What do you think of designer Katie Perry winning the case against Katy Perry? Let us know in the comments section on Facebook.