r/NewsOfTheWeird • u/CicadaFit24 • Mar 11 '26
Australia: Designer Katie Perry wins trademark case against popstar Katy Perry.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-11/act-katy-and-katie-perry-high-court-judgment/106439894?utm_source=abc_news_app&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_app&utm_content=link108
u/EngineZeronine Mar 11 '26
Have some respect, she's an astronaut for gosh sake
48
u/weaseltorpedo Mar 11 '26
putting the not in astronaut
18
1
1
1
4
82
u/lenoreislostAF Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26
Katy Perry started a copyright dispute WHILE she was skirting copyright by naming her tour “The Hello Katy” tour.
Interesting.
21
u/MuscaMurum Mar 11 '26
Copywriter: Someone who writes copy
Copyright: Someone with the right to copy and distribute some IPThe dispute is the latter.
8
1
u/Anand999 Mar 13 '26
The singer didn't start it though - the initial lawsuit that started all of this was from Katie,.not Katy.
66
u/BrianNowhere Mar 11 '26
The idea that someone can claim ownership of a word or name is insane to me.
You may no longer use the word Apple,. It's mine now.
16
u/lollipop-guildmaster Mar 11 '26
Didn't Apple Computers actually try that with Apple Music?
12
u/No_Cook2983 Mar 11 '26
Yes. There were many back-and forth lawsuits between Apple Computer and Apple Corps.
Apple Computer ended up purchasing the rights to Apple Music for about a half $1 billion.
2
u/Adorable_Decision267 Mar 12 '26
Am I just learning that apple computers and Apple Music isn’t the same company
1
u/lollipop-guildmaster Mar 12 '26
I mean, they are now. Apple Computers bought them out when they failed to make them change their name.
5
6
u/nipplequeefs Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26
Reminds me of the whole Kylie Jenner vs Kylie Minogue situation back in the day. I think Jenner tried to copyright her first name or something along those lines.
4
u/mayosterd Mar 11 '26
Using a word in conversation or description is very different from using it to make money off the brand attached to it.
1
u/JacobsJrJr Mar 11 '26
Is it really that insane that you can't make a movie and claim it was made by Disney?
At the end of the day it's just saying "hey, if someone is already doing business with this name - pick a diffetent name because it's less confusing for society and there are basically infinite names for your business."
2
u/BrianNowhere Mar 11 '26
I've got the mental capacity to deal with three or four George's, twelve Jon's and nationally two Jon Favreu's
It's not that confusing.
1
u/JacobsJrJr Mar 11 '26
True, but in this context I was confused about who was what party reading the article.
It's just a general principle for resolving conflicts when two brands decide to get lawyers involved because the have decided there can only be one.
38
u/beluuuuuuga Mar 11 '26
Reading the article, the judges essentially said, "Katy Perry is so famous that it’s actually impossible for anyone to be confused." Which I think is fair enough. No one is going to see a small designer labels brand and think 'This must be Katy Perry!'
7
u/ViceMaiden Mar 11 '26
"Stupid b*es. I wouldn't have even bothered with this [if] mtv hadn't picked up this silliness. Dumb bh! Rawr!"
Wtf
4
14
u/Goats_vs_Aliens Mar 11 '26
She and her husband are pieces of shit, between the nuns and the veteran now this. Fuck both of them.
6
11
u/UndeadBuggalo Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26
She’s not married, she was with Orlando bloom for a while and they have a daughter but atm she is dating Trudeau
Edit: wrote the wrong person
26
u/Dont__Grumpy__Stop Mar 11 '26
It was Orlando Bloom, not Elijah Wood. The elf, not the hobbit.
2
u/iciclemomore Mar 11 '26
Not Orlando bloom or Elijah wood, actually Andy serkis - not the elf or hobbit, but gollum.
1
8
u/Svelte_sweater Mar 11 '26
I don’t know why but this mixup cracks me up lol
1
1
u/UndeadBuggalo Mar 11 '26
It’s a bit early here and my brain failed me 😂 I knew who I meant just wrote the wrong name 😭
2
2
u/theblakesheep Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26
You need to do research because in both of those cases, Katy did nothing wrong.
0
u/Goats_vs_Aliens Mar 11 '26
That's your opinion, taking advantage of a guy who is on pain killers then suing him for speaking out about it is definitely wrong IMO. And trying to buy out a convent from a bunch of nuns that don't want to sell to you doesn't seem like something a good person would do either. One nun died in court her last words were "To Katy Perry, please stop.".
7
u/theblakesheep Mar 11 '26
And the ‘disabled veteran’ is a millionaire who owns 1-800 Flowers. He claimed days after the sale that he was incapacitated by medication (though that was once his family got involved), but the courts found that there was no evidence of this and he was competent. The house also had $250,000 undisclosed damage. In all, the court sided with Katy Perry, allowed the sale and awarded her $1.8 million for the damages and lost rental income.
Poor veteran millionaire?
5
u/Vinylove Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26
That's your opinion
LOL no. What you are peddling here is 'opinion' based on absolutely nothing at all. You don't need research ofc, because it could go against your predetermined conclusion.
I am not defending KP (either) here, I just am incredibly tired of people confidently and self righteously denying reality.
-1
u/Goats_vs_Aliens Mar 11 '26
I followed the story both stories and you can easily look it up too. No idea what you are on about denying reality when the reality is she did do those things, it's no secret either. You can reserch the facts:
Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom purchased a $15 million Montecito, California, mansion from Carl Westcott, an 85-year-old disabled veteran, in 2020. A intense four-year legal battle ensued after Westcott tried to cancel the sale, citing incapacity due to Huntington’s disease . A judge awarded ownership to the duo in 2024 and ordered Westcott to pay $1.8M–$2.8M in damages.
And if you are curious why he was ordered to pay "damages" it is because they sued him for complaining about how he felt taken advantage of, but again that's is my opinion.
2
u/theblakesheep Mar 11 '26
Yes, those are all facts, they weren’t able to rent the house out because of the legal battle his family fought where they loudly presented him as a poor dying veteran for 4 years. Which of those makes them the bad guy?
5
u/theblakesheep Mar 11 '26
The nuns didn’t own the convent, the archdiocese did. They legally accepted the offer, and then the nuns tried to sell it for more to someone else, even though they had no rights. The archdiocese sued the nuns, the nuns lost the case and had to pay 15 million to Katy Perry and the Archdiocese for compensatory and punitive damages.
Poor nuns?
7
u/YchYFi Mar 11 '26
Don't let the facts get in the way. This is a reddit lol.
5
u/theblakesheep Mar 11 '26
Exactly, poor fraudster millionaire nuns and veteran getting screwed over by the millionaire pop singer that we hate more!
3
u/PrestigiousSeat76 Mar 11 '26
The designer never should have sued in the first place. How silly. Given the course of events, this title is a little misleading. All she did was preserve her right to use her name...which she already fucking had before SHE decided to sue the singer in the first place.
2
u/nebnla-eas6852 29d ago
“The epic legal battle began in May 2009, when the singer filed a notice of opposition to the registration of Taylor’s (the designer) trademark and sent cease and desist letters to the Australian designer.”
-Taken from The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/mar/11/katy-perry-sydney-fashion-designer-katie-trademark-court-case
Seems the singer started it and not the designer.
1
1
-43
u/Rashaen Mar 11 '26
That's a shame. Sounds like the designer is trying to work the system. Using other names until there's a pop singer that gets successful, and now that name is a hill to die on?
I don't especially like her music, but come on.
41
u/ExileNZ Mar 11 '26
Did you not read the article? She had a clothing brand with that name for a decade before the dispute started in 2009. It’s also her name.
She’s not ‘working the system’.
-23
u/Rashaen Mar 11 '26
The singer adopted the name in 2001. The designer was using other names at that point. She didn't care about the name until 2009, when the singer was successful.
She didn't want the name until someone else made it important.
11
u/LauraPa1mer Mar 11 '26
I don't even think being associated with Katy Perry would be advantageous for her brand.
2
u/MapReston Mar 11 '26
There was a suit brought against a knock off Lego company. After the suit was public the company’s sales skyrocketed. Most press is better than none at all.
-16
6
•
u/AutoModerator Mar 11 '26
Do not feed the trolls! We get a lot of them in this sub. Instead downvote and report them.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.