Taylor Swift and the Law
But if he drops my name, then I owe him nothing
And if he spends my change, then he had it coming
Taylor Swift, Reputation, 2016
Throughout her career, Taylor Swift has been characterised by many stereotypes. America’s sweetheart. A ‘snake’. And, like many other Americans before her, ‘extremely litigious’. To fully understand the role of Taylor Swift as both a modern poet and a magnet of legal disputes a brief overview of these disputes is necessary:
Suing for a Single Dollar
In 2013, Swift claimed that she was groped while taking a photograph with a radio DJ ; a claim that was supported by a photograph taken during the assault. Not wanting to ruin the meet and greet for other fans, Swift said nothing. After the meet and greet she reported this and the DJ was fired, she took no further legal action. The DJ however, claimed she was lying and sued her for his lost earnings and defamation.
One major fact to note here is that Swift was accused of lying because she was smiling in the photo with the accused. The DJ’s counsel asked Swift in cross-examination why she didn’t say anything at the time (her response was: why didn’t he just take a normal photo?). The DJ also argued he would have been proven innocent by a two-hour phone call recording with his former employer. However, he didn’t have the recording in question as he later had spilled coffee on his computer, thrown away his phone, and broken his external hard drive.
In response to this claim that she was lying, Swift countersued for sexual assault with the claim thathe had groped her. She sought damages of $1 USD. She was quoted as stating in cross-examination, "I'm not going to allow you or your client to make me feel in any way that this is my fault, because it isn't. … I am being blamed for the unfortunate events of his life that are a product of his decisions and not mine”. Swift won this case. The Judge noted that Swift "did not act inappropriately” in reporting the assault and was later awarded her $1 USD (which she donated to charity).
This victory did not enrichen Swift but it did make global news—shining a light on the burden sexual assault cases have on the victims. As Swift, herself said, "I acknowledge the privilege that I benefit from in life, in society and in my ability to shoulder the enormous cost of defending myself in a trial like this," and in a statement following the verdict “My hope is to help those whose voices should also be heard."
Being Sued, and Suing a theme park
For many people around the world, one of the highlights of 2020 wasSwifts’ double album release of 'Folklore' and 'Evermore'. However, to struggling Utah theme park 'Evermore Park,' Swift was infringing upon their infringing on their registered title, 'Evermore'.
Given that their view that consumers would be unlikely to confuse an album charting on Spotify and a COVID-affected theme park in Utah,Swift and her legal team argued against the claims that her use of the phrase “Evermore” was an infringement. In addition to this, Swift and her many lawyers countersued Evermore Park for wilfully using her songs without the correct license. Swift had proof that the songs had been used in live performances at the park since at least 2019. After issuing a notice of their countersuit, Evermore Park and Swift entered negotiations and mutually decided to drop their claims.
Avoiding Litigation
Swift is evidently protective of her copyrighted work. As well as the claims outlined above regarding Evermore, her issuing of countless cease and desist letters to knock-off merchandise sellers on Etsy is well documented. In 2020, the roles were reversed with Swift being accused of violating copyright with the release of her 2020 album 'Folklore', stylised as 'The Folklore Album'. The logo artwork bore a striking similarity to the established brand 'The Folklore', who publicly criticised Swift for 'ripping off' their design. They further stated that Swift was perpetuating the trend of celebrities copying the work of small, minority-owned businesses. Swift and her team acknowledged this and altered their designs and removed the word 'the', making the designs far more distinct. In addition, to demonstrate good faith Swift pledged a donation to the Black in Fashion Council, supported by The Folklore brand.
It's unlikely Swift has completed LLB103 Dispute Resolution however surely James Duffy would be proud of her use of both the Court, and acting in good faith without litigation, to solve her disputes. To many, Swift represents a new generation of women and artists who have their minds open to using the law as a tool to protect their personal, intellectual and professional interests.
Article by Alexandra Feeney
This article appeared in the The Gavel #1 ‘The Among Us Issue’ (2021) Publication