A U.S. federal judge dismissed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Taylor Swift on Monday, ruling that claims the pop star plagiarized poems for her 2024 album The Tortured Poets Department lacked legal merit. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, presiding in Fort Pierce, Florida, determined that the plaintiff, Kimberly Marasco, failed to prove her work contained protectable expression or that Swift had accessed it.
Why the Court Dismissed the Plagiarism Claim
Judge Cannon’s dismissal with prejudice effectively ends the legal challenge, as the plaintiff cannot amend her complaint. According to the court’s ruling, the similarities cited by Marasco—such as the themes of confronting adversity, being “gaslighted,” or feeling “submerged” under water—constitute unprotectable ideas, metaphors, and isolated words rather than original, copyrighted expression.
The court noted that where Marasco attempted to introduce new allegations, the works were not substantially similar. The judge pointed out that Marasco herself characterized the alleged copying as “paraphrase” or “rephrase,” which does not meet the threshold for copyright infringement under U.S. law. This follows an earlier dismissal of a previous version of the lawsuit in September.
Copyright law protects specific expressions of ideas—such as unique arrangements of words or creative melodies—but it does not grant ownership over common themes, metaphors, or everyday vocabulary used in songwriting.
The Impact of Celebrity IP Disputes on Music Trends
What Happens Next for the Parties Involved?
Following the dismissal, Marasco stated via email that she disagrees with the court’s decision and intends to file an appeal. Conversely, legal representatives for Swift, Republic Records, and Universal Music Group have not yet provided a public response to the ruling.
Swift, who recently married Travis Kelce at Madison Square Garden on July 3, continues to promote her latest album.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a songwriter be sued for using common metaphors?
Generally, no. According to U.S. copyright standards, common themes, metaphors, and isolated words are considered “unprotectable” because they are building blocks of language rather than unique, original expressions.
What does “dismissed with prejudice” mean?
A dismissal with prejudice means the court has reached a final decision on the case. The plaintiff is legally barred from filing a new lawsuit based on the same claims or amending the current complaint.
How does a court determine “substantial similarity”?
Courts compare the works in question to see if an average, reasonable observer would find that the defendant copied protected elements of the plaintiff’s work. If the similarities are limited to general ideas or common phrases, the case is typically dismissed.
Stay informed on the latest legal developments in the music industry by subscribing to our newsletter. Do you think copyright law should be stricter regarding song themes? Share your thoughts in the comments below.