LOS ANGELES (AP) 鈥� A lawsuit says Taylor Swift’s stole the spotlight from the life of a real one.
Maren Wade says in the trademark infringement lawsuit filed Monday in federal court in California that the branding of Swift’s 2025 album comes too close to her own trademark of That was the name of a column she wrote on backstage Sin City life in the Las Vegas Weekly starting in 2014, which she turned into a live show that she took on a national tour.
鈥淏oth share the same structure, the same dominant phrase, and the same overall commercial impression,鈥� the lawsuit says. 鈥淏oth are used in overlapping markets and are directed at the same consumers.鈥�
Wade is described as a 鈥渟inger, songwriter, comedian, and writer鈥� in the lawsuit filed under her legal name, Maren Flagg, and her 鈥淪howgirl鈥� brand encompasses performances, writing and digital media.
the stadium-packing superstar’s 12th studio album, released in October, sold . Its cover features her in Las Vegas cabaret garb, submerged in water with her current favorite color scheme of orange and mint green. On Tuesday, the morning after the lawsuit was filed, Swift dropped the newest video for the album for the album’s track featuring archival footage of the Hollywood luminary who died in 2011.
Wade appeared to embrace Swift鈥檚 use of the showgirl image initially, sharing Instagram posts that used Swift’s music, hashtags related to the album, and the mint green color scheme. But Wade’s social media presence has gone silent in recent months.
Also named as defendants in the lawsuit are the company that manages Swift鈥檚 trademarks, her record label and its merchandising arm.
The lawsuit says the album, its promotion and the products surrounding it caused 鈥渢extbook reverse confusion: a junior user’s overwhelming commercial presence drowns out the senior user鈥檚 mark, until consumers begin to assume that the original is the imitation. What Plaintiff had built over twelve years, Defendants threatened to swallow in weeks.鈥�
A representative for Swift declined comment on the lawsuit.
Wade and her attorney say that the existence and trademark of 鈥淐onfessions of a Showgirl鈥� would not have escaped the notice of Swift’s team.
The lawsuit says the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office declined to grant a trademark registration to 鈥淟ife of a Showgirl鈥� over potential confusion with the existing trademark.
鈥淒efendants were therefore placed on actual notice that their chosen designation was likely to be confused with a mark that already belonged to someone,鈥� the lawsuit says. 鈥淭hey continued using it anyway.鈥�
A letter issued by the office in early March says the application was suspended due to potential confusion with another pending trademark filed earlier, for 鈥淪howgirl,鈥� by a third party and pertaining to perfume. It also cited a 鈥淟ikelihood of Confusion Refusal鈥� based on the existing 鈥淐onfessions鈥� trademark.
The lawsuit seeks an injunction permanently barring Swift and her companies from using the 鈥淟ife of a Showgirl鈥� name and imagery, and monetary damages to be determined at trial, including profits attributable to the use of the brand.
___
This story, initially published March 31, 2026, was updated on April 1 to clarify that the lawsuit hinged on the wording of the trademark application for 鈥淭he Life of the Showgirl.鈥�
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
