Teletubby 137,578 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 An Australian court has ruled that Katy Perry infringed the trademark of a Sydney-based fashion designer, Katie Taylor, who has sold her products locally under a label with her birth name "Katie Perry". Katie Taylor, who filed the lawsuit in 2019, alleged the singer ignored the trademark and sold Katy Perry clothing to Australian customers during her concert tours in the country through retailers and websites. Federal court judge Brigitte Markovic ruled that Katy Perry's company Kitty Purry partially infringed the trademark of Katie Taylor's business, which sells mostly clothes online, by promoting the singer's products through posts on social media, a court filing out on Thursday showed. Damages are due to decided at a later date. "This is a tale of two women, two teenage dreams and one name," Markovic said in her judgment. source Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
weed 71,439 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 4 minutes ago, Teletubby said: "This is a tale of two women, two teenage dreams and one name," Markovic said in her judgment. the judge after saying that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
River 106,463 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 17 minutes ago, Teletubby said: "This is a tale of two women, two teenage dreams and one name," Markovic said in her judgment. She's stanning your honor His fart felt like a kiss Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lippoutou 4,429 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 58 minutes ago, Teletubby said: Katy Perry's company Kitty Purry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bionic 43,880 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 imagine being katy perry and being banned from selling your tour merch because it has your name on it has her career not suffered enough buy bionic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nATAH 43,452 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 how bad is her lawyer for her to lose this? mother, what must i do? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FATCAT 59,114 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 15 minutes ago, NATAH said: how bad is her lawyer for her to lose this? Right? Like I don't know the specifics but surely they could have settled rather than take it to trial? I can't be free if my hands are tied... 🧟♀️👰🏻 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
monstertoronto 8,780 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 I very much doubt that there would have been confusion in the marketplace or that Katy Perry would have been trying to “pass off” her merch as “Katie Perry”’s, which are two of the tests for this type of case in North America. Maybe Australian law is different but this is absurd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charmz 3,880 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 50 minutes ago, monstertoronto said: I very much doubt that there would have been confusion in the marketplace or that Katy Perry would have been trying to “pass off” her merch as “Katie Perry”’s, which are two of the tests for this type of case in North America. Maybe Australian law is different but this is absurd. Idk if I saw Katie Perry I’d assume it was knock off Katy Perry lol Always & Forever, 🧚🏻♂️🦉CHARMZ🦉🧚🏻♂️ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARTFAP 1,251 Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 they are so SHADY for playing Dark Horse as a background song. 💀 the pettiness is real. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
monstertoronto 8,780 Posted April 29, 2023 Share Posted April 29, 2023 17 hours ago, Charmz said: Idk if I saw Katie Perry I’d assume it was knock off Katy Perry lol Exactly! Not the other way around, which is what this lawsuit is assuming. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.