The “Showgirl” Showdown: What the Taylor Swift Lawsuit Reveals About Creative Expression, Trademarks, and Commercial Identity

Taylor Swift has long been a household name, but in recent years she has become a commercial powerhouse. It is this commercial power that landed her in hot water with the release of her album ‘The Life of a Showgirl’.

On 30 March 2026, Maren Flagg filed a lawsuit against Swift, UMG Recordings, and Bravado International. Flagg alleged that the defendants’ use of ‘The Life of a Showgirl’ infringes Flagg’s registered trademark CONFESSIONS OF A SHOWGIRL.

Flagg asserts that in deploying ‘The Life of a Showgirl’ as a brand across merchandise and retail channels, the defendants’ use exceeds mere expressive use and constitutes trademark infringement. Flagg states Swift’s filing of a US trademark application to register THE LIFE OF A SHOWGIRL supports finding that Swift’s use was trademark use and not protected expressive use. The infringement is said to be exacerbated by Swift’s “overwhelming commercial presence” threatening to “drown out” Flagg’s brand. 

Central to the case is the Rogers test, under which a claim based on the use of a mark in an expressive work generally fails unless the plaintiff shows that the use is not artistically relevant or is explicitly misleading as to source. The Supreme Court later clarified that the Rogers test does not apply when the defendant uses the challenged designation as a trademark.

In a 2025 similar case, Lost International alleged Lady Gaga’s use of her album title ‘Mayhem’ on apparel violated Lost’s rights in its MAYHEM trademark. However, the court ruled that Gaga’s use of ‘Mayhem’ on merchandise was artistically relevant and did not mislead consumers. One difference between the cases is that Swift filed a trademark application to register THE LIFE OF A SHOWGIRL while Gaga did not.

The case against Swift continues to progress with a motion for preliminary injunction pending and a hearing on Swift’s motion to dismiss scheduled for 5 August 2026.

Key Takeaways

Cases like these illustrate the increasingly blurred boundaries between the music, entertainment, and retail industries today. The outcome of this case could help inform launch strategies for the music and entertainment industries, particularly as musical artists continue to transform album roll outs into multimedia, merchandise-driven business ventures.

What Artists and Their Collaborators Should Do

• Avoid being overly reliant upon expressive use as a defense if the plan is to commercialize titles of creative works.
• Before launching any collaboration with a musical artist, conduct robust trademark clearance searches for the artist’s name, album titles, catchphrases or any thematic concepts that might appear on apparel, accessories, or packaging as source identifiers.
• Trademark filings require strategy. Filing early can secure priority and deter squatters, as seen in Swift’s proactive filing strategy. But the filing can also be used as evidence of trademark use, not merely as artistic expression.
• Do not ignore niche performers or localized shows. A Las Vegas performer, local band or independent producer may have enforceable rights if they used the mark first.

By: RiKaleigh Omosheyin and Rianna Prince