In court, an Australian clothes designer defeated singer Katy Perry in a trademark battle.
The judge disclosed the results on Thursday, following the conclusion of the case’s hearings in the Federal Court of Australia last Friday.
Perry’s firm, Kitty Purry, was held accountable for damages resulting from infringements committed during the performer’s Prismatic Tour in Australia in 2014 and 2015, at Sydney and Melbourne pop-up stores, and on a website for goods company Bravado.
The judge concluded that the singer owed no remuneration to the designer since she utilised the Katy Perry trademark in “good faith.”
Katie Jane Taylor, who used her real name Katie Perry to sell and create garments, and the singer have been at odds since 2009.
Ms Taylor sued Perry for infringement in Federal Court in October 2019 ten years later.
According to Justice Markovic, the ongoing battle is a “tale of two women, teenage dreams, and one name.”
The judge has yet to decide how much Kitty Purry owes Ms Taylor in damages.
Katheryn Hudson changed her stage name to Katy Perry in 2004, and Katie Jane Taylor launched her Katie Perry clothing line in 2006.
Perry’s attorneys allegedly issued Ms Taylor “cease and desist” letters after trademarking the stage name in 2009, according to her lawyer in 2021.
“Ms Hudson and her advisors attempted to use their greater sophistication and financial might to snuff out Ms Taylor’s nascent business,” Barrister Christian Dimitriadis SC said.
Ms Taylor said in a 2020 blog post she “had no knowledge of the singer at the time”.
The judge found Perry’s name was more aligned with her status as a musician and entertainer than its connection to selling clothing.
“I am not satisfied that, because of that reputation, the use of [Ms Taylor’s trademark] would be likely to deceive or cause confusion,” Justice Markovic said.
