Billboard.com
Taylor Swift has secured a decisive legal victory after a federal judge dismissed a copyright infringement lawsuit accusing the singer-songwriter of copying lyrics from a self-published poet across multiple albums.
The ruling brings an end to a years-long dispute brought by Florida writer Kimberly Marasco, who alleged that Swift borrowed material from her poetry in songs spanning “Lover,” “Folklore,” “Evermore,” “Midnights” and “The Tortured Poets Department.”
In her decision, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon concluded that the similarities identified by Marasco involved only broad concepts, common phrases and everyday imagery that are not protected under copyright law. The court found that the lawsuit centered on general themes and isolated words rather than original creative expression, making the infringement claims legally unsustainable.
The judge also declined to allow Marasco another opportunity to revise her complaint, noting that previous lawsuits raising similar allegations had already been dismissed. According to the ruling, the deficiencies were not matters of drafting but stemmed from the fact that the claimed similarities involved ideas and expressions that copyright law does not protect.
Marasco first filed suit in 2024 against Taylor Swift Productions before launching a second action against Swift herself based on substantially similar claims. Throughout both cases, Swift’s legal team maintained that the allegations lacked any legal foundation, arguing that the disputed lyrics consisted of common language and universally used concepts rather than protectable original works.
The court agreed, finding that recurring words and phrases, including references to emotions, weather, relationships and other everyday imagery, could not form the basis of a valid copyright claim. The decision also rejected allegations involving newer tracks from “The Tortured Poets Department,” concluding that they relied on similarly unprotectable themes and observations.
Because the case was dismissed with prejudice, Marasco cannot file another amended complaint in the same court. She has indicated that she intends to appeal the ruling, though appeals courts generally give substantial deference to legal determinations regarding copyright eligibility.
About the Author
