Taylor Swift’s Copyright Case: Taylor Swift wins Kimberly Marasco’s lawsuit as judge rejects copyright claims of hit song | English Movie News

by


Taylor Swift wins Kimberly Marasco's copyright lawsuit as judge rejects copyright claim
A judge rejected the claim of poet Kimberly Marasco, and ruled that the similarity contained unprotectable ideas, themes and words that were similar. Photoshoot (Taylor Swift Instagram)

Taylor Swift has won a court order to end a copyright lawsuit filed by poet Kimberly Marasco, who claimed the singer copied lyrics from her poems on several albums. Judge Aileen Cannon issued the ruling on Monday, ruling that Marasco’s claims were unsubstantiated.Marasco alleged that Swift copied lyrics from more than a dozen songs on her albums ‘Lover’, ‘Folklore’, ‘Evermore’, ‘Midnights’ and ‘The Tortured Poets Department’, according to her lawsuit filed in February 2025. According to Global News, which received the dismissal decision, the judge’s decision confirmed that the works only share “ideas and basic themes” such as a woman working in the industry, “being polished” and facing problems.

Judge’s motion for dismissal

In his decision, the judge concluded that these types of ideas are outside the scope of copyright protection. “These are important themes, ideas, and separated words — exactly the kind of copyright laws that don’t protect,” Cannon wrote.The judge also noted some similarities between the non-infringing works. The law states that other important concepts include “familiar metaphors (‘drowning’ under water, ‘tears like weapons,’ ‘desire like wood and fire,’ being ‘rain/storm’); and familiar words and abbreviations (‘tears,’ ‘running,’ ‘fire,’ ‘rain,’ ‘sky,’ ‘love,’ ‘invisible blood,’ ‘visible time,’ ‘invisible’ go’).“Cannon promoted his views on what copyright law protects. “The alleged infringing material — basic concepts, themes, illustrations, abstracts, and abstracts — is not protected and cannot be infringed,” he wrote.

Woweruza amataya mlandu wa kukopera wa Kimberly Marasco wotsutsana ndi Taylor Swift<br />” msid=”132255869″ width=”” title=”The court found that the alleged overlap between Marasco’s poetry and Swift’s words was not eligible for protection. Photo (Taylor Swift Instagram)” placeholdersrc=”https://static.toiimg.com/photo/83033472.cms” imgsize=”” resizemode=”4″ offsetvertical=”0″ placeholdermsid=”47529300″ type=”thumb” class=”” src=”https://static.toiimg.com/photo/msid-132255869/judge-throws-out-kimberly-marascos-copyright-case-against-taylor-swiftbr.jpg” data-api-prerender=”true”/></p> <p>The court found that the alleged overlap between Marasco’s poetry and Swift’s words was not eligible for protection. Photoshoot (Taylor Swift Instagram)</p> </div> </div> <p><h2>Full court analysis</h2> </p> <p>The judge’s ruling addressed both the alleged copyright and Marasco’s failure to demonstrate copyright. “The Court holds that the Plaintiff’s poems do not constitute protected speech and, regardless, the Plaintiff has failed to consent to copyright. <!-- -->Dismissal is appropriate on independent grounds, and the Court need not reach Plaintiffs’ remaining motions,” Cannon wrote.<span class=The judge noted that Marasco was given several opportunities to amend his plea but failed to strengthen his case. “Plaintiff has had ample opportunity to rebut his claims; he has been warned that the Second Amended Complaint will be his last chance and the amendment will be futile,” the judge said, indicating that no further amendments would be allowed.

Taylor Swift adapambana pamilandu pamkangano wa kukopera <br />” msid=”132255882″ width=”” title=”Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that the complaints failed to prove a violation of their rights and dismissed the case. Photo (Taylor Swift Instagram)” placeholdersrc=”https://static.toiimg.com/photo/83033472.cms” imgsize=”” resizemode=”4″ offsetvertical=”0″ placeholdermsid=”47529300″ type=”thumb” class=”” src=”https://static.toiimg.com/photo/msid-132255882/taylor-swift-scores-legal-victory-in-copyright-disputebr.jpg” data-api-prerender=”true”/></p> <p>Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that the complaints failed to prove a violation of their rights and dismissed the case. Photoshoot (Taylor Swift Instagram)</p> </div> </div> <p><h2>Taylor Swift’s legal team controversy</h2> </p> <p>In December 2025 Swift’s legal team filed a motion to dismiss Marasco’s claims as “frivolous and without legal basis.” Prosecutors pointed out that the case is a futile legal process. “This is the second negligent and harassing case against the Singer alleging copyright infringement. Although he had no case against the Artist, and after being clearly told by this Court that his ‘words’ which he is allegedly infringing on are not protected under the copyright law, the Plaintiff filed another frivolous lawsuit and increased his campaign against and against the Republic of GI.<span class=Swift’s legal team determined that key concepts should not be protected by copyright. They said that “the idea of ​​infidelity or the words ‘fire’ or ‘love’ cannot belong to one person because they are ‘topics or words’ that are ‘not protected by copyright law.'”The lawyers concluded their arguments by emphasizing the lack of evidence in the case. “The Defendant has wasted the time and resources of the Artist, the other Defendants, and this Court for an extended period of time. This lawsuit is legally void and without merit and should be dismissed with prejudice,” Swift’s legal team wrote.

Taylor Swift agonjetsa mlandu wa Kimberly Marasco wokopera mawu <br />” msid=”132255900″ width=”” title=”Swift’s legal team argued that the claims were legally void, arguing that common themes and words could not be legal. Photo (Taylor Swift Instagram)” placeholdersrc=”https://static.toiimg.com/photo/83033472.cms” imgsize=”” resizemode=”4″ offsetvertical=”0″ placeholdermsid=”47529300″ type=”thumb” class=”” src=”https://static.toiimg.com/photo/msid-132255900/taylor-swift-defeats-kimberly-marascos-lyric-copying-lawsuitbr.jpg” data-api-prerender=”true”/></p> <p>Swift’s legal team argued that the claims were legally void, arguing that common themes and words could not be legal. Photoshoot (Taylor Swift Instagram)</p> </div> </div> <p><h2>Marasco’s answers are the appeal plans</h2> </p> <p>Although the court ruled on the decision, Marasco expressed his desire to follow other laws. The poet told Rolling Stone that he disagrees with the decision and will appeal the judge’s decision, saying he wants to continue to challenge Swift.<span class=

A trademark case

Swift is facing other legal challenges beyond the copyright lawsuit. He was also arrested recently by a Las Vegas actor who claimed his latest album infringes copyright. The singer claimed in her complaint that the promotion of Swift’s album threatened to “disrupt” her long-running show and asked the court to stop Swift from causing confusion with the title of her album.Swift’s lawyers asked the court to dismiss the trademark infringement lawsuit in May, describing the lawsuit as “just the latest attempt to gain publicity by associating herself with Ms. Swift,” according to the defendant’s notice and motion to dismiss.The decision marks another legal success for Swift, whose latest album ‘The Tortured Poets Department’ continues to be one of the best commercial hits of her career.



Source link

Leave a Comment