Taylor Swift Lawsuit: The “Showgirl” Trademark Case, and the One She Already Won
Questions about this case?
AI Legal Assistant · free · answers in seconds · general information, not legal advice
The Taylor Swift lawsuit in the news is a trademark case: a Las Vegas performer says the album title The Life of a Showgirl infringes her registered mark Confessions of a Showgirl. It is pending in federal court in Los Angeles. A separate copyright suit by a Florida poet was dismissed with prejudice on July 6, 2026. Neither case is a class action. There is no settlement, no fund and no claim form for fans or buyers.
Editorially Reviewed — Content reviewed for accuracy using published legal research, government data, and verified court records. See our methodology
Reviewed by Leonard Goldberg, Editor · Last updated
What Each Lawsuit Claims
The trademark case. Maren Flagg, who performs as Maren Wade, has used the name Confessions of a Showgirl since 2014, when it began as a Las Vegas Weekly column; it later became a cabaret show, a book and a podcast. She owns U.S. Trademark Registration No. 4800625, registered in 2015. The lawsuit alleges that Swift’s October 3, 2025 album The Life of a Showgirl and its merchandise infringe that mark. Her theory is “reverse confusion”: not that she trades on Swift, but that an album that sold more than four million units in its first week makes her older brand look like the copy.
She leans on a USPTO decision: Swift’s company applied to register The Life of a Showgirl on August 11, 2025, and on November 5, 2025 the examiner issued a nonfinal refusal in two of 14 classes, citing likelihood of confusion with her mark. That application is suspended.
The poet case. Kimberly Marasco, a Florida poet, alleged that Swift copied lines and metaphors from her poems into songs including “The Man” and “The Great War.” Those were allegations; the court rejected them.
Case Details
Trademark case: Maren Flagg v. Taylor Swift, No. 2:26-cv-03354, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, before Judge Serena R. Murillo. Filed March 30, 2026 against Swift, TAS Rights Management, UMG Recordings and UMG’s merchandise company Bravado. The claims include federal trademark infringement and a California unfair-competition claim.
Copyright case: Marasco v. Swift, No. 2:25-cv-14067, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, before Judge Aileen Cannon. Filed February 28, 2025 against Swift, Republic Records, Universal Music Group, Jack Antonoff and Aaron Dessner.
Status: One Case Pending, One Dismissed
Marasco v. Swift — dismissed with prejudice on July 6, 2026. Judge Cannon held that none of Marasco’s twelve counts identified any protected expression in the poems. An earlier version of the complaint had been dismissed in December 2025. Reuters reported that Marasco said she would appeal; we have not confirmed an appeal on the docket.
Follow this case
There's no claim deadline yet. We'll email you if a settlement opens a claim period.
Are You Affected?
Almost certainly not as a party. Both cases are individual lawsuits between one plaintiff and Swift’s side. There is no class, so fans, album buyers and merchandise customers are not members of anything and have nothing to join.
The only practical effect on buyers would come from the trademark case: Flagg asked the court to bar all use of The Life of a Showgirl title, which would reach merchandise sales. No such order has been reported. Items you already own are not affected by a trademark dispute.
If you came here about the 2022 Eras Tour ticket sale: the fans’ class action from that episode was filed against Ticketmaster, not against Swift. See our Ticketmaster settlement page.
Is There Any Money for Fans?
How cases like this one end
Our copy of the federal courts’ own case database covers 36,250 federal civil cases of this typeclosed in U.S. federal district courts between 2015 and 2025:
- 24.2% ended in a settlement recorded by the court. Another 27.7% were dismissed voluntarily, which often follows a private settlement — so the real settlement share sits between 24.2% and 52%.
- 4.3% were decided on a motion before any trial.
- 1 in 108 reached a trial (0.9%), after a median of 28.3 months.
- Median time from filing to the end of the case: 5.7 months.
- Only 2,724 of them (7.5%) record a money award at all; the median of those is $500,000.
These are base rates for this type of case (federal trademark cases) — not a prediction about this lawsuit, and not legal advice. Source: Federal Judicial Center, Integrated Database (civil), analysed by Settlement Insight. Cases heard in state courts are not included.
Taylor Swift Lawsuit Timeline
- 1
February 28, 2025 — Poet Files Copyright Suit
Kimberly Marasco sues Swift, Republic Records, Universal Music Group, Jack Antonoff and Aaron Dessner in the Southern District of Florida (2:25-cv-14067).
- 2
August–November 2025 — Album and USPTO Refusal
Swift’s company applies to register The Life of a Showgirl on August 11. The album is released October 3. On November 5 the USPTO issues a nonfinal refusal in two classes.
- 3
March 30, 2026 — Showgirl Trademark Suit Filed
Maren Flagg (Maren Wade) sues in the Central District of California (2:26-cv-03354) and later seeks a preliminary injunction against all use of the title.
- 4
May 26–27, 2026 — Motion to Dismiss and Hearing
The defendants move to dismiss on May 26. At the May 27 hearing Judge Murillo focuses on free-speech protection for album titles and takes the injunction under submission.
- 5
July 6, 2026 — Poet Case Dismissed With Prejudice
Judge Aileen Cannon dismisses Marasco v. Swift, finding the claimed material was ideas, themes and common phrases that copyright does not protect.
- 6
October 2026 — Showgirl Case Awaits Rulings
After the June 16 amended complaint and new dismissal briefing, the motion was set for an early October hearing. As of October 6, 2026, no ruling had been reported.
Three Things to Watch For
A famous name and a pending case make easy bait, even though no fan has a claim:
“Taylor Swift settlement” claim pages
There is no Taylor Swift settlement for fans, buyers or concertgoers. A site asking for your card number or ID to “release your share” is collecting data, not filing a claim.
“Showgirl merch recall” refund messages
No court has ordered merchandise pulled or refunded. Emails or texts offering a refund on The Life of a Showgirl merch if you “verify” your payment details are phishing.
Eras Tour ticket “compensation” offers
Messages that mix Swift’s name with ticket refunds lean on the old Ticketmaster dispute. Real notices in a ticketing case come from a court-appointed administrator and never ask for a fee.
Taylor Swift Lawsuit — Questions People Actually Ask
Who is suing Taylor Swift right now?
Las Vegas performer Maren Flagg, known as Maren Wade, in Flagg v. Swift, No. 2:26-cv-03354, in federal court in Los Angeles. She says the album title The Life of a Showgirl infringes her registered mark Confessions of a Showgirl. Swift, TAS Rights Management, UMG Recordings and Bravado deny it.
What is “reverse confusion”?
It is a trademark theory where the bigger, newer user swamps a smaller, older one, so the public starts to think the original is the imitation. Flagg’s counsel argued she built her brand for 12 years; Swift’s lawyers call the premise absurd and say nobody would mistake a cabaret show for Swift’s album.
Why does the free-speech argument matter so much?
Titles of creative works get extra protection under the Rogers test unless they are not artistically relevant or explicitly misleading. Judge Murillo called that question “the real crucible” at the May 27, 2026 hearing. Flagg argues the protection was lost when Swift’s company tried to register the title as a trademark.
Didn’t the USPTO side with the performer?
Partly, and only provisionally. On November 5, 2025 the USPTO issued a nonfinal refusal in two of the 14 classes in the application, citing likelihood of confusion. The application is suspended. Swift’s lawyers argue a nonfinal office action proves nothing in court.
What happened to the poet who sued Taylor Swift?
Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed Marasco v. Swift with prejudice on July 6, 2026, writing that the claimed overlaps were “quintessential themes, concepts, and isolated words” that copyright does not protect. Dismissal with prejudice means the complaint cannot be refiled in that court; an appeal is the only route left.
Is there a Taylor Swift class action I can join?
No. Neither case is a class action, and there is no settlement, fund, administrator, claim form or deadline. Any page inviting you to register for a Taylor Swift lawsuit payout is not connected to these cases.
Could the album or its merch be pulled from sale?
Flagg asked for a preliminary injunction barring use of the title. Judge Murillo took it under submission after the May 27, 2026 hearing, and as of October 6, 2026 no ruling had been reported. Swift’s side argues the album title is protected expression and that Flagg waited eight months to sue.
What about the Eras Tour ticket lawsuit?
That was a fans’ class action against Ticketmaster over the 2022 presale, not a case against Swift. Our Ticketmaster settlement page covers the ticketing cases.
Separate from this case: were you injured in the last 2 years?
Class-action payouts are fixed amounts through an administrator. A personal injury claim is a different case — and often worth far more. Free estimate, no obligation.
Related Consumer Brand Lawsuits
Music Copyright Lawsuits
How song-copying claims work and why most of them fail
Ticketmaster Settlement
The ticketing cases fans actually have a stake in
Copyright Damages Calculator
Statutory and actual damages in infringement cases
Open Class Action Settlements
Settlements currently accepting claims, with deadlines