Monday, December 23, 2024

Katy Perry wins ‘David and Goliath’ trademark battle against Sydney fashion designer

Must read

American pop star Katy Perry has won a bitter legal feud with Aussie fashion designer Katie Jane Taylor over her ‘Katie Perry’ trademark for selling clothes. 

Taylor sued the singer in April 2023 for trademark infringement in the Federal Court. 

The mum of two has operated a clothing label under her birth name Katie Perry for eighteen years, and held the trademark in Australia for more than a decade.

The Sydney designer sued the singer, whose real name is Katheryn Elizabeth Hudson,  claiming she infringed her trademark by using one that was ‘substantially identical to or deceptively similar’.

Taylor claimed Perry was using the trademark in Australia since at least 2013, selling products not only at her concerts, but also at shops such as Myer and Target.

She partially won her claims in the Federal Court in 2023, but Perry filed an appeal. 

On Friday the appeal court reportedly found in Perry’s favour because Taylor’s trademark was not ‘validly registered’ in 2008.

The registration was not valid because the trademark was likely to deceive or cause confusion at a time when Perry was already a ‘nationally and internationally famous pop star’ who had ‘released several singles and an album which had achieved significant exposure in Australian media,’ the decision said. 

Perry had proposed a ‘coexistence agreement’ with Taylor which she turned down

Katie Jane Taylor sued Perry in April 2023 for trademark infringement in the Federal Court

Katie Jane Taylor sued Perry in April 2023 for trademark infringement in the Federal Court

The court said the trademark was deceptively similar to Katy Perry’s name despite the different spelling of Katie. 

While ‘die-hard’ fans might recognise the spelling difference, the average consumer would likely be confused. 

Taylor’s lawyers had told the court that she did not become aware of Katy Perry until July 2008, and had registered her Katie Perry domain name in Australia in May 2007. 

The court also mentioned that in July 2009, the pop star had proposed a ‘coexistence agreement’ with Taylor which she turned down, and which would have been an ‘excellent outcome for both parties.’ 

‘In that sense, Ms Taylor has brought this result on herself. Unfortunately, it is no longer possible to return to the time of peaceful coexistence.’ 

Taylor will need to apply for special leave if she wants to launch an appeal in the High Court, and she is now faced with a heavy costs order. 

She told the Sydney Morning Herald she was ‘devastated’ at the outcome.

‘I won my case at first instance and to have it overturned on appeal is heartbreaking,’ she said. 

Taylor claimed Perry was using the trademark in Australia since at least 2013

Taylor claimed Perry was using the trademark in Australia since at least 2013

Even The Bachelor star Thomas Malucelli threw his support behind Taylor

Even The Bachelor star Thomas Malucelli threw his support behind Taylor

‘This case proves a trademark isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. My fashion label has been a dream of mine since I was 11 years old, and now that dream that I have worked so hard for since 2006 has been taken away.

‘I will take some time to digest today’s decision and work out my next steps with my legal team and circle of supporters.’

Despite the backlash Taylor received from Perry’s fans, a network of Aussie support had kept her spirits high during the legal battle.

Even The Bachelor star Thomas Malucelli threw his support into the ring, modelling the small business owner’s clothing range.

‘You rock, my friend,’ Malucelli wrote under a post celebrating her initial court win against Perry. 

Daily Mail Australia has contacted Taylor for comment.  

Latest article