A Sydney-based fashion designer named Katie Perry has won her 16-year trademark dispute with Katy Perry.
The designer, Katie Taylor, was born Katie Perry, and applied to register that business name in April 2007 – claiming not to have heard of the singer at that time. She then went on to apply to register the “Katie Perry” trademark for the sale of clothes the following year, shortly after the release of Perry’s huge debut single ‘I Kissed A Girl’.
Then, when the singer performed in Australia for the first time that year, her team created an online store selling official merchandise.
A legal battle then followed in May 2009 when the singer’s team filed a notice of opposition to the registration for the designer’s trademark and allegedly sent cease and desist letters to Taylor.
Katy Perry’s manager, Steven Jensen, dismissed claims that they had tried to keep Taylor from “trading under her name” and denied that they had “sued her for trademark infringement” – claiming that the situation had been created and blown out of proportion by tabloids.
In the summer of 2009, Taylor had her “Katie Perry” trademark approved and was allowed to use it on her clothing range. Then, in 2011, the singer’s own trademark was registered, but this did not extend to clothing.
#BREAKING: Australian fashion designer Katie Perry wins her High Court battle against international pop star Katy Perry in a long running trademark case. https://t.co/1EM4hFlX7w
— ABC News (@abcnews) March 10, 2026
According to The Guardian, the designer then sued the singer and alleged that her trademark had been infringed upon due to the sale of clothes branded under the name “Katy Perry” in Australia.
The singer’s team hit back with a cross claim, requesting for Taylor’s trademark to be cancelled and alleging that the label would be “likely to deceive or cause confusion”.
In 2023, the designer won her appeal and it was ruled that the singer’s Kitty Purry label – used in her 2014 ‘Prismatic’ tour – had infringed on her trademark. Then, Taylor lost an appeal in 2024, when the singer’s crossclaim was backed by judges, and Taylor’s trademark was ordered to be deregistered.
Now, the case has finally been settled after nearly 17 years, with three of five high court judges siding with Taylor.
They rejected claims made by the musician’s team that the ‘Firework’ singer had already got a big reputation in the country by the time that Taylor applied for the “Katie Perry” trademark. They also ruled that Kitty Purry was infringing on Taylor’s trademark rights when used in 2014.
The judges then also noted that the majority of merchandise sold by the singer in Australia was clothing, despite her team registering the “Katy Perry” trademark to not include items of clothing.
With the ruling, Taylor’s trademark can remain in place, and Taylor wrote on her website that the decision was not just about a name, but about “protecting small business in Australia, for standing up for what is right and showing that we all matter.”
In other Perry news, it was reported last year that the singer was set to receive $1.8million (£1.3million) from a disabled war veteran following another lengthy legal row.
She released her seventh album ‘143’ in September 2024, which NME awarded two stars and described as “a serviceable but slightly dull collection on which Perry struggles to relocate her old sense of fun”.
Controversies surrounding the album included her choice to work with Dr. Luke despite the abuse and assault allegations against him –which he has continuously denied – and the supposed male gaze-centric nature of her single ‘Woman’s World’, which she defended as satire.
The singer is set to play a series of outdoor shows in the UK and Ireland this summer, including a performance at Cardiff Castle.
