Sydney designer Katie Perry wins court case against pop star Katy Perry
Updated ,first published
A Sydney fashion designer who sells clothes under the name “Katie Perry” has won his epic legal battle against pop star Katy Perry after the High Court ruled he persistently infringed on the singer’s trademark.
On Wednesday, the nation’s highest court upheld an earlier ruling. Firework The singer “calculated disregard” for trademark rights to designer Katie Taylor (née Perry), marking the end of a nearly 17-year dispute.
Taylor, owner of a company Small business selling lifestyle essentialsShe first applied to trademark “Katie Perry” in September 2008, after she began selling her clothes at Paddington Markets in Sydney. Months ago, Katheryn Elizabeth Hudson, who performs under the stage name Katy Perry, released her first hit single: I Kissed a Girl, A career that includes more than 150 million record sales is born.
For Taylor, this would be the beginning of a long David and Goliath battle with a global megastar.
Perry’s management first sent cease and desist letters to Taylor under the name Katie Perry in 2009.
During evidence, the court heard Perry’s manager Steven Jensen learned of Taylor’s trademark in 2009 and tried to persuade the artist to make a statement about the matter.
“As is common in Australia, the tabloids took this and turned it into a ‘story’,” he said in emails quoted in the decision.
But Perry said he wanted to “keep me out of this completely.”
“Stupid bitches. I wouldn’t even bother with that [if] MTV didn’t understand this nonsense. Stupid bitch! Rawr!” he said.
Taylor later rejected Perry’s team’s proposed agreement for the two trademarks to co-exist and took legal action against the singer in 2019.
It was successful before the Federal Court in 2023, when judge Brigitte Markovic ruled that it had infringed the singer’s trademark. This decision was overturned on appeal by the Full Federal Court in 2024, and the judges ordered the cancellation of Taylor’s trademark.
But on Wednesday, three Supreme Court judges – Jayne Jagot, Simon Steward and Jacqueline Gleeson – sided with Taylor, while two of her colleagues opposed it. Perry’s team argued that Taylor’s trademark was likely to be misleading or cause confusion, as the singer already had a reputation as early as September 2008. However, the High Court rejected this claim, ruling that Perry had no dress reputation in Australia. Although her career was on the rise, not a single Katy Perry-branded track had been sold in Australia by that date.
Instead, the court ruled that Perry had failed to prove that there was genuine confusion over the trademark. Star Perry, who has a net worth of US$360 million ($505 million), will have to cover Taylor’s expenses. The exact figure will be determined by the Federal Court.
Gilbert + Tobin partner Michael Williams, who leads the firm’s technology and intellectual property group, told this imprint that the Supreme Court’s imminent decision will have a significant knock-on effect.
“I think it will strengthen the fundamental principles [around trademark law]“And I think it would probably be seen as a pretty logical conclusion that you have an Australian trademark owner whose rights cannot easily be infringed upon by an international celebrity,” he said.
Williams told this imprint that the Supreme Court’s majority decisions also express disapproval of Perry’s behavior toward Taylor.
“There’s also a theme of majority judgment, which essentially translates into disapproval of the dismissive manner in which the singer and her management approached the Taylor trademark application,” he said.
A representative for Perry said: “Katy Perry never tried to shut down Ms. Taylor’s business or stop her from selling clothing under the KATIE PERRY label. Today, in a 3-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Ms. Taylor’s trademark can remain registered.”
Taylor said in a statement that the decision was a victory for small businesses.
“As a small business owner and mother of two young children, this process has been incredibly challenging,” she said.
“There were emotionally exhausting moments, but I believed in the importance of defending my work and defending justice.”
The Business Briefing newsletter delivers big stories, exclusive news and expert insights. Sign up to receive it every weekday morning.
Kishor Napier-Raman is senior business writer for The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age. He previously worked as a CBD columnist and reporter in the federal parliament press gallery.Connect with: X or email.
