Facebook
Britain's News Portal
Around The Clock
BREAKING
Loading latest headlines…

Taylor Swift Wins 'Absurd' Copyright Case Over Song Lyrics

Pop superstar Taylor Swift has successfully defended herself against a copyright infringement lawsuit regarding her song lyrics. A federal judge dismissed the case, ruling that the alleged similarities were based on common themes and ubiquitous metaphors.

  • Taylor Swift won a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by poet Kimberly Marasco.
  • Marasco alleged Swift stole lines and inspiration for over a dozen songs across multiple albums.
  • Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case, stating the similarities were 'vague references' and 'common observations'.
  • This is the second similar lawsuit from Marasco against Swift that has been dismissed.
  • The judge refused to allow Marasco to refile, citing the unprotectable nature of the alleged infringed material.

IT'S GAME OVER FOR KIMBERLY MARASCO! Global superstar Taylor Swift has slammed shut the door on a "frivolous" copyright lawsuit that threatened to tarnish her sparkling reputation. A US federal judge has delivered a knockout blow, dismissing claims that she plagiarised lyrics from a self-published poet's poems for over a dozen songs across multiple albums.

Kimberly Marasco had launched a scathing attack on Swift, alleging that she'd ripped off lines and inspiration from her poems for tracks like 'The Man', 'My Tears Ricochet', and 'Illicit Affairs' on albums including 'Evermore', 'Folklore', 'Midnights', 'Lover', and 'The Tortured Poets Department'. But Judge Aileen Cannon wasn't buying it, ruling that the only common ground between Marasco's poems and Swift's lyrics were "vague references to gaslighting" and "ubiquitous metaphors". The judge made it clear: copyright law doesn't protect such generic themes, concepts, or phrases – they're free for all.

Swift's legal team has been fighting this battle since 2024, denying any wrongdoing at every turn. And now, with another victory under their belt, the pop star's reps have proved that they won't back down from a fight. "This lawsuit was always baseless and frivolous," said Douglas Baldridge, Swift's attorney. "We're thrilled with the outcome."

Marasco is taking the decision on appeal, but for now, it looks like Swift has emerged victorious once again. This ruling sends a clear message to artists in the music industry: don't try to own ideas that are as common as rain or sunshine – they belong to everyone!

The phrases Marasco alleged were stolen include "it's time to go," "fire," "rain," "sky," "tears," "running," and "love". But Judge Cannon made it clear: these are just everyday words, not copyrighted material. This ruling is a major win for Swift, but it also highlights the complexities of copyright law in the music industry – where artists often face intense scrutiny over their lyrical originality.

Why this matters: This case highlights the ongoing challenges artists face regarding copyright claims, especially when dealing with common phrases and themes. It sets a precedent for how 'originality' is interpreted in creative works, impacting songwriters and poets globally.

What this means for you: What this means for you: This ruling reinforces that common phrases and universal themes are generally not protectable under copyright law, which could influence how UK artists and writers approach their creative work and understand their intellectual property rights.

Related Articles

Get the news that matters.

Join thousands of readers getting the best of British news straight to their inbox.