26/03/2026
The trade mark “Katie Perry” is officially the one that got away for American singer Katy Perry (“Popstar Katy”). Well, at least in relation to clothing.
On 11 March 2026, in the matter of Taylor v Killer Queen LLC [2026] HCA 5 the High Court of Australia made orders setting aside the decision of the Full Federal Court of Australia which favoured Popstar Katy and allowed an appeal from Katie Taylor (“Designer Katie”).
This lengthy and well publicised case, spanning over 17-years, is likely to be considered a landmark judgment in intellectual property law, but what does this outcome actually mean for business owners and their intellectual property?
In summary, this case is a win for small business owners and highlights the importance of early registration. Designer Katie will maintain her trade mark registration “Katie Perry” for clothes thanks to her early registration of the mark.
The High Court considered three main factors in making their decision:
- whether Designer Katie’s mark was validly registered in the first place because of Popstar Katy’s reputation, considering sections 60 and 88(2)(a) of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) (TMA);
- the likelihood of confusion under section 88(2)(c) of the TMA; and
- the grounds for cancelling Designer Katie’s mark.
The High Court disagreed with Popstar Katy’s argument that the reputation of her mark in Australia before the priority date of Designer Katie’s mark meant Designer Katie’s mark was likely to deceive or cause confusion. Instead, the High Court found the opposite, Popstar Katy’s reputation was able to distinguish the marks more, and it is unlikely a consumer would confuse a small clothing label with Popstar Katy’s brand.
The Court therefore held that the reputation of Popstar Katy’s mark at the priority date did not invalidate the initial registration of Designer Katie’s trade mark, nor did it justify the cancellation of the mark.
Interestingly, Popstar Katy’s argument surrounding her international and high-profile reputation being a reason to prevent others using a trade mark similar to her name was not accepted by the Court, highlighting the importance of context in relation to reputation.
Ultimately, Popstar Katy’s was found to have infringed the Australian Designer’s trade mark.
So, in light of these findings, what should business owners consider? Business owners should consider:
- the current and early registration of their trade marks;
- the registration of trade marks in the appropriate classes;
- the existence of any competing marks; and
- seeking expert advice from Griffin Legal.
Contact our expert intellectual property team at Griffin Legal for advice on protecting your organisation’s intellectual property rights.