Taylor Swift’s company filed three trademark applications with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office on Friday, April 24, seeking to lock down two sound marks of her voice and a visual mark of a concert photograph.
The filings, submitted on behalf of Swift’s TAS Rights Management, include two sound trademarks for short spoken phrases and a single visual trademark for a photograph. The two audio filings cover the phrases "Hey, it's Taylor Swift," and "Hey, it's Taylor." The visual application describes Swift holding a pink guitar with a black strap while wearing a multi-colored iridescent bodysuit and silver boots, standing on a pink stage in front of a multi-colored microphone with purple lights in the background.
The three applications were spotted by intellectual-property attorney Josh Gerben of Gerben IP, who later wrote about the filings in a blog post on Monday. Gerben, who does not represent any parties involved in the Swift filings, said the applications reflect a growing concern among talent in the entertainment industry about the potential danger of artificial intelligence to take artists' voices and likenesses without consent.
The move follows several high-profile incidents in which Swift's likeness was used without permission. Her image and voice have surfaced in AI-generated fakes, including appearances in pornographic images circulating online and in creations produced by Meta's AI chatbots. In the run-up to the 2024 U.S. presidential election, Donald Trump shared AI-generated images of Swift that inaccurately suggested she had endorsed him.
Legal advisers point to an emerging playbook. State right-of-publicity laws in places including New York and California already bar unauthorized commercial use of a person's image and likeness; some lawyers now view trademark filings as a supplementary legal tool that can reach national audiences through federal courts. Trademark infringement lawsuits can be filed in federal court and have nationwide effect, which is one reason entertainment figures have begun to test the approach.
The trademark route is not unprecedented. Lawyers for Matthew McConaughey secured similar protections before Swift's filings; in 2025 the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office granted eight trademarks for McConaughey, including a sound mark on audio of him saying "Alright, alright, alright!" and registrations covering audio and video clips. That precedent is cited by attorneys who argue that trademark law can be adapted to block commercial impersonations amplified by AI tools.
Still, the strategy contains friction. Trademark law was not historically designed to protect a person's general likeness, voice or persona; its primary purpose is to prevent consumer confusion about the source of goods or services. That gap means Swift's applications could be tested in court, forced to confront where advertising protection ends and personal-image protection begins—especially when noncommercial or parody uses are involved.
Swift's filings make plain what many in entertainment now publicly worry about: technology can fabricate a recognizable voice or image and distribute it worldwide in minutes. By trying to register short spoken phrases and a distinctive stage photograph, TAS Rights Management is betting trademark law can become a faster, broader remedy than state publicity statutes alone. The likely outcome is more litigation that will determine whether trademarks will become a standard legal shield against AI-driven fakes or a limited tool useful only in narrow commercial cases.
