Kamal Ghorui
Australian fashion designer Katie Perry has won her long-running trademark fight against pop star Katy Perry in Australia’s High Court, ending a dispute that started in 2009 when the singer prepared for her ‘Hello Katy’ Australian tour. In a majority ruling, the court found the designer’s trademark did not damage the singer’s reputation, was not likely to confuse shoppers, and did not breach trademark law. The decision hands a major victory to the designer after years of legal action over clothes, shoes, and headwear sold under the Katie Perry and Katy Perry names.
Trademark case over Katie Perry and Katy Perry
According to ABC News Australia, the case centered on who had the right to sell clothing under the Katie Perry or Katy Perry name. Katie Perry, the designer, said she began using the name for clothing first and applied to register it before she had heard of the singer. The court heard that she only became aware of Katy Perry after hearing ‘I Kissed A Girl’. She later sued in Federal Court in 2019, arguing that her trademark had been infringed by sales of the singer’s branded merchandise.The designer won at first, then lost on appeal. The appeal judges found the singer had built a reputation in Australia before the clothing label was established and said the Katie Perry mark was open to cancellation. Katy Perry’s lawyers argued that the singer’s stage name could not be separated from its reputation in the market. But the designer said her adoption of the mark was innocent and pointed to a decade of trading without confusion.
High Court judgment and Katy Perry emails
In the High Court ruling, Justice Simon Steward highlighted emails from Katy Perry’s manager, Steven Jensen, from 2009. In one email, he wrote, “She has ‘traded’ under the name of Katie Perry since 2007.” He added, “Of course, this issue has been blown way out of proportion as we (you) have not tried to keep her from trading under her name, and have certainly not sued her for trademark infringement.”Jensen also wrote, “We are arranging for some publicity (probably a press release) to clarify the situation.” Katy Perry replied, “I say keep me outta it entirely.” She added, “Make it less important but release something from management, pretty much stating the facts … Don’t soften it up, don’t apologize, nothing.”Justice Steward said Jensen had incorrectly stated that the respondents had done nothing to stop the registration of the appellant’s mark. He also described Katie Perry’s label as a “self-funded small business” and called the singer’s side “a persistent or assiduous infringer of the appellant’s validly registered ‘Katie Perry’ mark.” Costs were awarded in the designer’s favor.Disclaimer: This report is a journalistic account of a recent court development. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy based on available information, this is not a substitute for the official court order or legal advice. The final ruling, which will be published by the court, is the definitive source of information. This article serves as a report on the current status of the case and should not be considered legal guidance.
