close
close

Katy Perry wins appeal in trademark dispute with Sydney fashion designer

Katy Perry wins appeal in trademark dispute with Sydney fashion designer

Earlier that year, Perry’s US lawyers sent Taylor a cease and desist letter in an attempt to stop the designer’s application to register her trademark.

“Ms. Taylor rejected this offer of a coexistence agreement, which, as it turned out, would have been an excellent outcome for both parties,” the decision said.

Loading

“(By rejecting) the offer, Ms. Taylor chose to pursue infringement proceedings… In that sense, Ms. Taylor brought this outcome upon herself. Unfortunately, it is no longer possible to return to the times of peaceful coexistence.”

The Full Court granted a limited stay to prevent the trademark cancellation order from taking effect until the appeal process in the High Court is completed. Taylor, who also faces huge costs, does not have an automatic right to appeal and will have to apply for special leave.

Taylor told Sydney Morning Herald: “I am devastated by the outcome of the case. I won my case at first instance and to have it overturned on appeal is heartbreaking.

“This case proves that a trademark is not worth the paper it is printed on. My fashion brand has been my dream since I was 11 years old, and now that dream that I worked so hard for since 2006 is gone.

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

In her decision last April on one of the singer’s biggest hits, judge Brigitte Markovic said: “This is a story about two women, two teenage dreams and one name.”

In securing a partial victory for Taylor, Markovic said Perry infringed Taylor’s “Katy Perry” trademark in a series of tweets and Facebook posts between 2013 and 2018 while she promoted Katy Perry merchandise available in connection with it. Prismatic world tour, Cozy little Christmas hoodies, t-shirts, sweatpants and scarves, as well as pop-up stores.

The judge also found that Perry’s company, Kitty Purry, was liable, along with travel retail company Bravado, for infringing on Taylor’s trademark in advertising and selling Katy Perry’s clothing during Prismatic Australian leg of the tour, in pop-up stores in Sydney and Melbourne, and on the Bravado website.

But the appeal court found Taylor’s trademark infringement claim could not succeed and overturned a series of rulings made last May.

The law firm representing Perry in Australia declined to comment.

Start your day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.