Taylor Swift Challenges 'Swift Home' Trademark

Thursday, 2026/02/19228 words3 minutes85 reads
Pop superstar Taylor Swift has formally requested that the US government block a bedding company's attempt to trademark the phrase "Swift Home", asserting that it could mislead consumers into believing she had endorsed their products.
Her legal representatives argued that Cathay Home, a New York-based company that distributes bedding items through major retailers, has styled the word "Swift" in its branding in a manner that closely resembles the singer's trademarked cursive signature. Swift, represented by TAS Rights Management LLC, filed an appeal against Cathay Home's application with the US Patent and Trademark Office on Wednesday.
The filing contends that the "Swift Home" mark creates a "false association" with the singer, potentially leading Cathay Home's customers to believe the pop star had endorsed its products in some capacity. Swift's legal team asserted that this was done with the intent of exploiting her "goodwill and recognition" for the company's commercial advantage.
According to the documents, Swift owns federal trademarks that protect the use of her name and signature on various goods, including bedding, apparel, and music-related merchandise. The singer-songwriter has filed more than 300 trademarks across the US and other jurisdictions, securing protection for her name, initials, album titles, and select lyrics. With an estimated net worth exceeding $1 billion, largely attributed to her recent record-breaking global tour, Swift has demonstrated a consistent commitment to protecting her intellectual property rights.
Taylor Swift Challenges 'Swift Home' Trademark

Connect

Audio

Loading audio ...
00:00

Words

  • assert
  • contend
  • exploit
  • jurisdiction
  • attribute

Quiz

  1. 1

    What is the primary legal argument Swift's team is making against Cathay Home?

  2. 2

    Based on the article, what can be inferred about Taylor Swift's approach to intellectual property?

  3. 3

    What does the article suggest about the scope of Swift's trademark portfolio?