Taylor Swift wants to trademark Blank Space, Swiftmas, 1989 & more

tay1

Taylor Swift is going to sue the person who knitted that ^^ sweater, you just know it.

Back in January, Taylor Swift went on a trademarking blitz and she was widely slammed for it. She filed paperwork to trademark several of her song titles and lyrics, including This Sick Beat™, Welcome To New York™, Cause We Never Go Out of Style™, Party Like It’s 1989™, Swiftstakes™ and more. To be fair to Obnoxious Nazi Barbie™ (trademark by Camille Paglia), Taylor’s trademarking blitz was about trying to shut down second-rate vendors who would (and have) used Taylor’s lyrics and songs to make their own profits. The problem? Taylor and her lawyers started sending cease-and-desist letters to Swifty fans who were selling Swifty-related stuff on Etsy, for the love of God. Well, in any case, there are more words and phrases we can no longer use without paying Swifty. Like, we can’t even make any reference to 1989™ now.

A not-so-merry Swiftmas, y’all. Taylor Swift recently applied to trademark several terms related to her body of work, and among them is the fan favorite “Swiftmas.” According to blog Tantalizing Trademarks, the 25-year-old singer is also looking to trademark the phrase “Blank Space” (a hit off her 1989 album), “And I’ll Write Your Name” (a line from aforementioned song), “A Girl Named Girl” (the title of a novel Swift wrote when she was 15), and “1989” (in reference to her latest album).

The site reports that Swift submitted an application with her request to trademark the five phrases on Dec. 3; earlier this year, the Grammy winner reportedly also tried to trademark phrases like “this sick beat” and “nice to meet you; where you been,” both lines from her songs “Shake It Off” and “Blank Space,” respectively.

It’s important to note, however, that if the application goes through, the use of the term “1989” won’t be trademarked in and of itself — only when it’s in reference to her album title.

[From Us Weekly]

If Taylor had her way, we would no longer be able to say “sign here, on the blank space.” Her fans could never make reference to Swiftmas. And any references to anything that happened the same year that George HW Bush came into office would be completely off the table! God help any Etsy vendor who dares to make any kind of reference to 1989!!!

PS… Today is Swifty’s birthday. Do you think she’s getting a ring from Calvin Harris? Do you think she wants a ring from Calvin Harris?

Me acting all moody during Trouble but actually so happy because that Melbourne crowd was INCREDIBLE tonight.

A photo posted by Taylor Swift (@taylorswift) on

Photos courtesy of WENN, Instagram.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

83 Responses to “Taylor Swift wants to trademark Blank Space, Swiftmas, 1989 & more”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. two_seconds_ago says:

    How far up is your head that you want to trademark a DATE, Swifty??

    • UESider says:

      I think she’s trademarking the style/font in which 1989 appears on her merch, not the year itself. To avoid bootleg merch, I guess?

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        That’s rich. She had no trouble stealing an artist’s copyrighted drawing of a fox and using it repeatedly on merchandise and social media without compensating or acknowledging the artist. When caught, TS merely offered the artist a small lump sum payment and a very unfair settlement agreement.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        @Bearcat

        Hearing that doesn’t surprise me in the slightest. She has an amazing head for business: screw the little guy and then do everything to make sure every penny passed through hands ends up in her pockets.

      • SnarkySnarkers says:

        Can we also talk about Satan’s Homegirl wanting to trade mark #Proudmama? Yea…

      • lucy2 says:

        Wow, Bearcat, I didn’t know about that.
        I have no issue with her preventing people from selling stuff with the album cover art, that is a copyrighted image and not fair game, but hearing that her team then doesn’t extend the same respect to other artists is awful.
        The generic phrases and stuff seems over the top.

    • Nk868 says:

      It’s a specific font/style. If her lawyers advised her to prosecute the vendors using her lyrics they also have to prosecute the etsy vendors. If you are passive and don’t prosecute/protect your trademark it can become public/fair use, kind of like adverse possession with real property. She wouldn’t be able to enforce it against some unless she enforced it against all. This was also initiated by her lawyers, not TS, in all likelihood.

  2. Ladybird83 says:

    It’s time for someone to shut her down a little. You can’t trademark everything. What about other people born in the year 1989? Fucking ridiculous.

    • Spaniard says:

      She has reached a whole new level of narcissistic stupidity. I was born in 1989 and in December like her so maybe she’ll sue me twice for copyright infringement.
      She has lost touch with real world. Getting so annoying.
      Trade marking a year and the term blank space?? Girl is official your head is completly up your own ass. Can’t wait for you to get lost

  3. Lara K says:

    Horrifyingly ungrateful little witch. Oh you are a fan? Well you’ll get to seee me in court. Awful.

  4. Moffa says:

    She is so extra. It’s exhausting. I can’t imagine how much work it must be for her to constantly force the world to revolve around herself. I truly don’t know how she survived Adele’s take over.

  5. vauvert says:

    Guys, no need to pearl clutch. Trademarking the phrases is to stop people cashing in with t-shirts that bear her face/phrase, or mugs or stuff like that. Same thing Disney and Marvel do, it is protecting your brand. It does not stop people using the terms in conversations, it just does not allow someone to sell an item that references Swift and the terms as used in her song.

    • Amelia says:

      I tend to agree, Vauvert.
      It’s fairly standard business practice, there’s no reason to get riled up about not being able to say ’1989′ again. It’s only in relation to her intellectual property.
      If I were her, I’d leave the Etsy sellers alone, though. In my experience they mostly tend to be sweet-natured superfans.
      Guess that’s why I’m not a millionaire!

    • Carol says:

      Exactly. I actually don’t see what the big deal is about. Its not like the term Blank Space will be trademarked and prevent that phrase from being used in every day language. Thats ridiculous and thats not how trademarks work.

    • Shambles says:

      I can’t stand anything about her, irrationally, so I’m biased. I understand what you’re saying completely, but from Taylor it just comes off so incredibly smug. Does she really think that the entire world is so fixated on selling t shirts featuring her music that she has to trademark every minute little line in every song that she’s ever written? Next she’ll be trying to trademark the phrase “And The” because she used it in a song somewhere. And the “Swiftmas” thing? Ugh. Because everyone is just dying to make Christmas about YOU, Taylor, protect your assets.
      But again, she irritates me on an irrational level, so forgive my rantiness.

      • vauvert says:

        I hear you, but think about recent events when certain personalities were issued cease and desist letters for using a song they had no right to in political circumstances. Same thing, right? And everyone agreed… I think this is her lawyers’ advice and she takes it. (I also think she has a big say in the decision, unlike people who believe her to be a simple puppet for advisors – I think she knows her own mind to a large extent. But if you already dislike her, this won’t endear her to you for sure. I like her fine, no mad adoring fan, but I can be, hopefully, objective.)

      • Bridget says:

        I’m just going to point out, these are likely in response to people already selling these items. She may not be your cup of tea, but it’s her brand to protect.

    • Sheila says:

      So if I’m understanding correctly, I could make and sell a t-shirt that says “1989″ for people born that year as long it isn’t in the font on her album or references her work in any way. Is that correct?

    • Elisa the I. says:

      You’re spot on, vauvert.

      • Lille says:

        Yeah, this is standard copyright stuff, and not weird at all. Every company, author, performer does this. she is annoying, but this article seems like it is totally blowing things out of proportion and making stuff up. Some on Celebitchy, you used to be my fave site because you don’t do that! I could come here for realistic gossip.
        Not only do companies copyright their popular brands, phrases, etc they copyright fonts and potential near copies that they feel like would interfere with their brand, or confuse customers. She is just trying to get ahead of vendors who would sell t shirts and other things with her likeness, and popular catch phrases associated with her. The vast majority of those asked to cease and desist would be selling on a way larger scale than an etsy seller, as she has a worldwide following. Tours are exhausting, and one reason stars put so much into them is that they can set themselves up for life with them, and merchandising is a huge part of that.

      • Elisa the I. says:

        @Lille: ITA! I love Celebitchy because the articles are written in a witty and very entertaining way and I usually have the feeling that the authors are well-informed, rather objective and think things through. But this article is full of spite, IMO. Again, I’m not a fan of Taylor Swift, but this arcticle does what everyone is TS accusing of: mean-girling.

    • Bridget says:

      Did people even read the article? She’s not trying to trademark the entire year 1989.

  6. Mia says:

    Her teeth bother me. They look like dentures.
    Also; really dislike this mousy little witch and her granny hair. Advice; Less ash, more curls tay Tay.

  7. Malificent says:

    I graduated from college in 1989. Is she going to sue when my school posts a reunion banner?

  8. Armenthrowup says:

    Go away, you tiresome little mediocrity.

  9. kayte says:

    Significant historical events in 1989?? Berlin Wall, Montreal Massacre @ École Polytechnique,Tianneman Square protests. That’s what comes to mind for me.

  10. JKL says:

    She look like a doll in the top pic. A strange, creepy doll.

  11. CornyBlue says:

    She is not copyrighting the year but a certain design of the year 1989. Since she did not come u with the concept of numbers or calendar time she cannot copyright a year. The whole thing seems extra tho.

  12. Mitchie says:

    She’s going to end up trademarking all the words in the dictionary. Well, the small words at least.

  13. Dane says:

    She is remarkable unattractive in both appearance and personality. Horse teeth.

  14. Ellie says:

    I think she and Calvin broke up if they were ever more than a PR tactic. No photos of them together in months, and we know she parades her famous friends and “lovers” around as much as possible with selfies and carefully orchestrated photo opps. Yes, she’s been on tour, but that hasn’t stopped her from posting Girl Squad (probably the next ™ for her) photos in recent months. I’m not sure there’s been any photos of them since he had that whole scandal surrounding the massage parlor that may or may not (but probably does) offer happy endings.

    • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

      Yeah, Calvin’s gone, with Merry Swiftmas coming up Taylor probably knew her PR relationship could only end two ways: it quietly fizzles out and she can go dark and then post later about how they’re ‘good friends’ or she can push for a ring she won’t get from a guy who goes scorched earth on his own exes.

    • Lama Bean says:

      Agree! Just posted this a week or so ago. I think they broke up a while ago and she doesn’t want to acknowledge it because it reinforces the image she worked so hard to shake for the last few years.

    • zinjojo says:

      I think they’re broken up too. One of the commenters here posted a couple of weeks ago about a friend of a friend situation in Vegas that involved Calvin and evidently pictures were being shared among the friend group. So don’t know if they were ever anything more than PR, but don’t think they’re together now.

    • Clairej says:

      They were only just snapped in Queenstown, NZ a couple of weeks ago.

      • Halvin Carris says:

        Uh I think that was her brother. If the DJ got papped there it would’ve gotten coverage in the press.

  15. Tania says:

    TS and her squad need to go away. They’re grating on my nerves.

  16. DONNA MARTIN says:

    She’s just a pop star! Yes a rich one but not even legitimate music legends have not gone to this extent. I know she’s a savy business woman but there’s nothing special about her music or lyrics. Ugh so frustrating.

  17. Brunswickstoval says:

    I wish she’d trademark her hair so it could NEVER be repeated again

  18. Miran says:

    I’m I’m still trying to reconcile the fact that this is the same girl who sang that Tim McGraw song

  19. Jane says:

    I can see a future bad Saturday Night Live routine coming up one day having a person saying any one of those words or phrases. Then a giant string with a sign attached to it along with a clip drops down from above that person saying, “Pay Taylor Swift Now”.

  20. The Eternal Side-Eye says:

    If she just eased up on the ‘Gosh! Shucks!’ routine and actually owned her personality as someone shrewd and calculating in business things would go so much easier for her.

    It’s funny because most other female artists all respectively have their own personality and style are confident in owning it. Swift is still trying to be pudding and pie so when these stories hit it always seems like hypocrisy.

    Sure Swift, you’re for protecting the little guy and small artist against big bad Spotify and Apple but those thieving evil wenches on Etsy? Nope, they better pay the fee and bow down. Oh wait you used someone else’s artwork for monetary gain without compensating them? Gosh! Shucks! Kittens!

    • smcollins says:

      That is what I find so irritating about her, and always have. This whole wide-eyed naïveté that she’s constantly peddling is exhausting, not to mention nauseating. I remember an interview she did with Leslie Staul some years ago and LS straight up questioned her about the authenticity of her awe & bewilderment of the cheering crowd every time she took the stage, like it was an act. It was kind of awesome. I’ve always found her persona to be so phony.

  21. Nancy says:

    In all “reality” she isn’t that much different than the Kardashians. Everything has to be about her. She needs to sit down with her mother and remember her roots. She is just a performer who got lucky…..now her head is so big she has trouble pulling her kitten adorned sweater over it.

  22. AlmondJoy says:

    It’s hilarious that after a week of getting bashed publicly Taylor decides to do something like this. She’s giving people even more reason to hate her. She should really try to be less annoying.

  23. Betti says:

    I allays thought the album 1989 was a swipe at Adele and how she uses her age for album titles. Jumping on that bandwagon much swifty. She’s all about what her due, screw everyone else’s.

    • Nancy says:

      A lot of them use their birth year in some capacity as though that was such a special special year because they were born in it. A lot of rappers use their birth years as tattoos. These folk sure do have inflated egos. Bless their egomaniacal hearts

    • word says:

      She already sells shirts in China that say “T.S. 1989″ which is a little insensitive considering the Tiananmen Square massacre that happened there in 1989!

  24. Louise177 says:

    This is ridiculous. Some things I understand but this is overkill. Was she able to get away with copyrighting “Welcome to New York” and “This Sick Beat”? Those are such common sayings that I can’t imagine she deserves exclusivity. Swiftmas sounds like something her fans did. I don’t see how she can stake a claim it if they did. Copyrighting “1989″ seems farfetched. It’s so basic that I’m sure something similar has been done.

  25. Marianne says:

    I mean on one hand I get it. She’s trying to protect her image/brand by having control over it. But on the other hand this seems really ridiculous. Like trademarking “Blank Space”? Really? Like c’mon you’re not the only person who thought of that phrase.

    • word says:

      Yeah just like how Kris Jenner is trying to trademark “proud mama” and “momager”. She didn’t invent those words. It’s stupid you would have to pay her to use them if she gets the trademark.

  26. Patty says:

    She should be more like Katy Perry.

    • Persephone says:

      That would be the Katy Perry that sued a woman named Katie Perry who had launched her own fashion label a year before Katy released her first single.

  27. Learned One says:

    Blank Space = The void between her ears.

  28. Frosty says:

    In fairness a lot of entertainers do this – my favorite being Madonna’s attempt to trademark, wait for it, Madonna.

  29. Original T.C. says:

    This is the best Swifty story of the week. Completely emphasizes her greedy and pettiness. Will begin opening the eyes of her young fans while their parents brag about what a great role-model she is (e.g. Non-sexual). LOL.

  30. Halvin Carris says:

    She just released a video on SM about her “Live 1989 Tour” allegedly being some kind of Apple exclusive. If this is truly going to be an exclusive thing, meaning no hard copy or availability on other formats, it’s going to make her whole David vs Goliath {Taylor vs Apple) last summer look more like a backroom deal. I always thought that Apple letter was a sham/PR marketing strategy from the get-go.

  31. Lara K says:

    She should trademark Am-bitch-ous and Pomp-ass.
    Would at least be accurate…

  32. Tiffany says:

    Well, it was bound to happen that she was going to get knocked off her pedestal. I just did not think it would happen this soon. I would have thought of another 2 years of the media kissing her backside.

  33. Fluff says:

    Not a fan but that’s completely fake. She copyrighted the specific logo that has 1989 in it, not ’1989′ itself.

    • Idon'tCare says:

      If you check out Leann Rimes “1982″ you will see that Taylor had good reason to want to copyright the specific logo, as it appears to “possibly” be a direct copy ~allegedly. I think Taylor is using smart business sense, and I don’t see what’s wrong with that.

  34. Dangles says:

    It’s called Swiftmas because it seems to come around faster and faster each year.
    Maybe Calvin Harris is going to give her the trademark for Happy Birthday for her Birthday. It seems apt.

  35. Naddie says:

    Sometimes I feel sorry for her, and I don’t know why.

    • Dangles says:

      I’m fairly indifferent about her and her music as I find both fairly banal. But she’s over exposed and overrated by the media and that’s what I resent.

      • Naddie says:

        Yeah, her range as a musician is not worth of her fame and money. And there’s something hysterical about her that screams “unhappy person”.

  36. Willa says:

    I hope her copyright on 1989 is denied. I understand the marketing angle, but its so ambiguous.

  37. LAK says:

    Ridiculous.

  38. Sez says:

    Has Adele trademarked the numbers 19, 21, 25 and the word “Hello”??

  39. serena says:

    Wtf does she think she is? It’s just crazy!

  40. Cinderella says:

    This sounds like something a greedy stage dad, who is also a finance guy, would be behind. In her defense, I can’t imagine that she’d even have time to think about this crap.

  41. TreadStyle says:

    This girl is the definitions of both narcissist and greed. I seriously don’t see still is so big when she has been having so many slip ups showing her true colors in the past two years. It’s absurd.