“When Plaintiff’s attempts to exploit Ms. Swift’s intellectual property failed to garner the desired attention (likely because, despite Ms. Flagg’s best efforts, consumers were not confused into believing these two brands were even remotely connected),” the lawsuit continued. “She concocted a meritless lawsuit and brought this Motion for Preliminary Injunction. The Motion fails at every turn.”

Swift’s legal team goes on to say her album is protected by First Amendment rights and calls Flagg’s comparison of her cabaret show to Swift’s album “absurd.”

“First, The Life of a Showgirl is a musical Album, not a live theatrical cabaret show,” the filing continued. “And while Ms. Swift has not performed Album music as of this submission, historically her performances are musical concerts at sold-out stadiums with thousands of attendees, not at golf resorts or cabaret-style venues.”

In conclusion of the latest filing, Swift’s legal team simply stated, “Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction should be denied.”

As for Flagg’s history with the word “showgirl,” she previously registered her trademark for “Confessions of a Showgirl” in 2015. In her initial lawsuit, she argued “the mark achieved incontestable status” prior to the release of Swift’s album. 

“The designation was affixed to consumer goods, stamped onto labels, tags, and packaging, and deployed as a source identifier across retail channels,” the lawsuit stated, “all directed at the same audience Plaintiff had spent years cultivating.”

A trial date has not been set for the case. For more details on Swift’s latest album, keep reading…