Taylor Swift lodges a Trade Mark application for her voice in Australia

“HEY, ITS TAYLOR SWIFT” ™

Taylor Swift lodges a Trade Mark application for her voice in Australia

On 12 October 2026, IP Australia accepted an application to register Taylor Swift saying "Hey, it's Taylor Swift" as a sound trade mark.[1]

The applicant is TAS Rights Management, LLC, the company that seems to own Swift's intellectual property.[2] The Australian filing is part of what appears to be part of a global trademarks lodged all over the World, with similar applications on foot in the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union.[3]

Whilst we know it is possible to Trade Mark a sound, registration of a celebrity's spoken voice is somewhat new and has not been tested in court.[4]

Taylor Swift will own a registered Trade Mark for her voice

The Australian application for Taylor Swifts voice saying the words ‘HEY, ITS TAYLOR SWITF’ is trade mark number 2702892. It is a "sound" mark, described on the register as "the spoken words HEY, IT'S TAYLOR SWIFT", and the record notes that the voice is Swift's and that her consent to registration is on file.[5] Key details from the record are:[6]

• Filed: 6 October 2026.
• Accepted and advertised: 12 October 2026, six days after filing.
• Priority date: 24 April 2026, based on US application 99/784,980.
• Services (class 41): (in summary) entertainment information and news about a musical artist, and websites providing non-downloadable audio and video in the field of a musical artist and entertainer.

Overseas, some of the filings are as follows:

• United States: three applications filed on 24 April 2026, for recordings of Swift saying "Hey, it's Taylor Swift" and "Hey, it's Taylor" and for a photograph of her on stage with a pink guitar.[7] All three are still pending.[8]
• United Kingdom: a sound mark for "HEY, IT'S TAYLOR SWIFT", filed on 6 October 2026, is still under examination.[9] A separate application for the stage photograph, filed on 7 October 2026, was published in the UK Trade Marks Journal on 16 October 2026.[10]
• European Union: a sound mark filed on 6 October 2026 and a figurative (image) mark filed on 7 October 2026 are both under examination.[11]

What Is the Opposition Period?

Once IP Australia accepts a trade mark, anyone may oppose its registration by filing a notice.[12] A notice of intention to oppose must be filed within two months from the day the acceptance is published.[13] For this mark, acceptance was published on 12 October 2026, so the period runs to mid-December 2026.[14]

If no one opposes, the Registrar must register the mark.[15]

Trade Marks can only be opposed on certain grounds. That is, if you are not a Swifty (and would dare consider taking on the Swifty Army) and take issue with Taylor Swift owning a registered Trade Mark for her voice, you cannot simply oppose her application. Rather, the Opposition process is there, in summary, to ensure that other business owners who may be the true owner of a Trade Mark can oppose new applications to ensure that the register is a true reflection of who the correct owner.

Another ground for Opposition is that the Trade Mark breaches some law, however Shaking It Off and obtaining global IP protection for ‘Hey, Its Taylor Swift’ in the voice we can probably all imagine in our head right now, does not break any laws.

So, this one looks like it will proceed to registration in due course.

Why Trade Mark a Human Voice?

It is a bit strange right? To lodge a Trade Mark for your voice. But with the influx of AI generated videos and music, its actually a really clever move.

AI-generated versions of Swift have appeared in recent years, including explicit images, a fake election endorsement and bogus product endorsements.[16] More broadly, multiple news reports indicate that AI deepfakes have become widespread in recent times, from cloned voices of politicians to AI tracks imitating major artists.[17]

US trade mark lawyer Josh Gerben, who first reported the US filings, has suggested that registering phrases tied to Swift's voice could let her challenge not only exact copies but also imitations that are "confusingly similar".[18] He has also said he expects other public figures to follow Swift's lead.[19]

At the time of this article in October 2026 (the Month Taylor lodged her application) AI is already incredibly advanced and capable of creating a completely artificial film clip of (for example) Taylor Swift, singing a song with a voice that sounds exactly like Taylor Swift. Whilst that one is easier for Taylor’s legal team to tackle on grounds set out below, what about a scenario where a fake artist is created, who does not look like Taylor Swift, but sounds exactly like Taylor Swift… well, this might be the start of Trade Mark infringement cases against AI generated music doing just that.

How a Registration Could Make Takedowns Easier

A registered sound Trade Mark would be very helpful for Swift's legal team in a number of ways:

• Platform complaints. Major platforms such as YouTube and TikTok have dedicated trade mark complaint processes and can remove infringing content.[20] A registration number makes such a complaint easier to make out.
• Imitations, not just copies. Infringement covers a sign that is "substantially identical with, or deceptively similar to" the registered mark, so a convincing AI clone saying the same or a similar phrase may be caught.[21] This may even extend to other phrases (not simply the words ‘Hey, it’s Taylor Swift’) if the voicing is deceptively similar.
• Court remedies. A court can grant an injunction and, at the owner's choice, damages or an account of profits (handing over the infringer's profits). It can also add extra damages for a flagrant infringement or to deter others.[22]

The Limits

Whilst a trade mark does not grant a monopoly over a person's voice, and the registration would strictly only cover one recorded phrase, for the specific class 41 services[23] the services here are broadly music and videos.

Infringement requires the other person to use the sign "as a trade mark", meaning as a badge of origin, in relation to the same, similar or closely related goods or services.[24] Wider protection for unrelated goods or services is available only for a mark that is "well known in Australia", and only if further conditions are met.[25]

That means a deepfake song, a parody, or a voice clone saying something completely different may arguably fall outside the registration. There are also defences, such as good faith descriptive use and comparative advertising.[26] Sexually explicit deepfakes are dealt with by separate online safety and criminal laws (see below).[27]

Can Sounds Be Trade Marks in Australia?

Sounds have, for a long time, been capable of being registered Trade Marks in Australia.

A trade mark is a "sign" used to distinguish your goods or services from those of others, and "sign" expressly includes a sound, as well as words, shapes, colours and scents.[28] An application must be rejected if the mark is not capable of distinguishing the applicant's goods or services.[29]

Other Tools Against AI Impersonation in Australia

Unlike the United States, Australia has no specific law aimed at preventing the unauthorised use of a person's image, and no dedicated right protecting a person's voice.[30] Instead, a person whose voice or image is used without permission usually relies on a mix of laws:

• Australian Consumer Law. It is unlawful, in trade or commerce, to engage in misleading or deceptive conduct, or to falsely represent that goods or services have someone's sponsorship or approval.[31] Using a well-known endorser's image in a way that suggests they back a product can breach these rules.[32]
• Passing off. This court-made claim protects reputation against false suggestions of a connection. In Radio Corporation Pty Ltd v Henderson, two professional ballroom dancers stopped a record company using their photograph on a record cover, because buyers would probably take it as their approval of the record.[33] In Pacific Dunlop Ltd v Hogan, the Full Federal Court dismissed an appeal against findings that a shoe advertisement recalling the "knife scene" from Crocodile Dundee was passing off and misleading conduct.[34] Passing off may help a well-known person whose AI-generated voice confuses consumers, but it offers little to people without an established reputation.[35]
• Copyright. The human voice itself is not protected by copyright in Australia. Copyright protects sound recordings, but an AI voice clone is a new soundalike rather than a copy of a recording, so an infringement claim is unlikely.[36]
• Online safety and criminal laws. Intimate images that have been faked to look like someone, including AI deepfakes, can be reported to the eSafety Commissioner for removal.[37] Sharing sexual material of an adult online without consent is a federal offence, including where it was created or altered using AI.[38] Queensland has also introduced a bill to make creating such deepfakes an offence.[39]
• A proposed "face and voice" law. Senator David Pocock's My Face, My Rights Bill would create a complaints and enforcement system for deepfakes of a person's face or voice shared without consent, and a right to sue under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).[40] It was introduced on 24 November 2025 and, as at 28 October 2026, was still before the Senate.[41]

Key Takeaways for Brand Owners and Creatives

• Think beyond words and logos. A jingle, a sign-off, a sound or a catchphrase may be registrable if it identifies your business.
• File early, and think internationally. Swift's team used a US filing to claim an earlier priority date in Australia and the UK.[42] Under the Paris Convention, you have six months from your first filing to claim it for a trade mark.[43]
• Choose your services carefully. Protection follows the goods and services you list, so cover the areas where impersonation would hurt you most.
•  Use every tool, and keep evidence. Trade marks, consumer law, passing off and platform policies work best together, backed by screenshots, links and dates.

How We Can Help

Registering the right trade marks now, and acting quickly when an imitation appears, gives you the strongest footing to have AI copies taken down.

IP Partnership Lawyers acts for brand owners, creatives and businesses across Australia. Contact our team to discuss protecting your brand or responding to an AI impersonation.

This article is general information only and is not legal advice. You should obtain advice specific to your circumstances. Information is current as at28 October 2026.

[1]IP Australia, 'Trade Mark 2702892: HEY IT'S TAYLOR SWIFT', Australian Trade Mark Search (Web Page, accessed 28 October 2026) <https://search.ipaustralia.gov.au/trademarks/search/view/2702892>.
[2]IP Australia (n 1); Daryl Lim, 'Taylor Swift Trademarking Her Voice and Likeness Points to a New Legal Frontier in Combating AI Deepfakes', The Conversation (online, 28 May 2026) <https://theconversation.com/taylor-swift-trademarking-her-voice-and-likeness-points-to-a-new-legal-frontier-in-combating-ai-deepfakes-282558>.
[3]World Intellectual Property Organization, 'US Trade Mark Applications 99784977, 99784979 and 99784980 (TAS Rights Management, LLC)', Global Brand Database (Web Page, accessed 28 October 2026) <https://branddb.wipo.int>; Intellectual Property Office (UK), 'Trade Mark UK00004455958', Search for a Trade Mark (Web Page, accessed 28 October 2026) <https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00004455958>; European Union Intellectual Property Office, 'EU Trade Mark Applications 019432121 and 019432402 (TAS Rights Management, LLC)', eSearch plus (Web Page, accessed 28 October 2026) <https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/#details/owners/1012807>.
[4]IP Australia (n 1); Josh Gerben, 'Taylor Swift Moves to Trademark Her Voice and Image as AI Threats Grow', Gerben IP (Blog Post, 27 April 2026) <https://www.gerbenlaw.com/blog/taylor-swift-moves-to-trademark-her-voice-and-image-as-ai-threats-grow/>.
[5]IP Australia (n 1).
[6]Ibid.
[7]Gerben (n 5); Megan Cerullo, Emily Pandise and Jo Ling Kent, 'Taylor Swift Files to Trademark Her Voice and Image amid Rise in AI Deepfakes', CBS News (online, 28 April 2026) <https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taylor-swift-ai-voice-likeness-trademark/>.
[8]World Intellectual Property Organization (n 4).
[9]Intellectual Property Office (UK), 'Trade Mark UK00004455958' (n 4).
[10]Intellectual Property Office (UK), 'Trade Mark UK00004456266', Search for a Trade Mark (Web Page, accessed 28 October 2026) <https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00004456266>.
[11]European Union Intellectual Property Office (n 4).
[12]Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) s 52(1).
[13]Trade Marks Regulations 1995 (Cth) reg 5.6(1).
[14]IP Australia (n 1).
[15]Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) s 68(1).
[16]Ian Youngs, 'Taylor Swift Files to Trademark Voice and Image after AI Concerns', BBC News (online, 27 April 2026) <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crm1mygrmv2o>; Lim (n 3).
[17]Tamika Mansell and Rita Matulionyte, 'Protecting Human Voices in the Age of AI: Australian Copyright Law and Beyond', Kluwer Copyright Blog (Blog Post, 8 July 2026) <https://legalblogs.wolterskluwer.com/copyright-blog/protecting-human-voices-in-the-age-of-ai-australian-copyright-law-and-beyond/>; Stassen (n 2); Laura Lavelle, 'Queensland Government Introduces New Laws Criminalising Creation of Sexually Explicit Deepfake Images', ABC News (online, 27 October 2026) <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-10-27/new-ai-deepfake-laws-in-queensland/107313374>.
[18]Gerben (n 5).
[19]Cerullo, Pandise and Kent (n 8).
[20]YouTube, 'Trademark', YouTube Help (Web Page, accessed 28 October 2026) <https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6154218>; TikTok, 'Intellectual Property Policy' (Web Page, 27 March 2025) <https://www.tiktok.com/legal/page/global/copyright-policy/en>.
[21]Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) s 120(1).
[22]Ibid s 126.
[23]IP Australia (n 1).
[24]Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) s 120(1)–(2).
[25]Ibid s 120(3).
[26]Ibid s 122(1).
[27]eSafety Commissioner, 'Image-Based Abuse' (Web Page, accessed 28 October 2026) <https://www.esafety.gov.au/key-topics/image-based-abuse>; Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) sch 1 (Criminal Code) s 474.17A.
[28]Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) ss 6 (definition of 'sign'), 17.
[29]Ibid s 41(1).
[30]Arts Law Centre of Australia, 'Unauthorised Use of Your Image' (Information Sheet, accessed 28 October 2026) <https://www.artslaw.com.au/information-sheet/unauthorised-use-of-your-image/>; Mansell and Matulionyte (n 18).
[31]Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) sch 2 (Australian Consumer Law) ss 18, 29(1)(g)–(h).
[32]Arts Law Centre of Australia (n 31).
[33]Radio Corporation Pty Ltd v Henderson [1960] NSWR 279.
[34]Pacific Dunlop Ltd v Hogan (1989) 23 FCR 553.
[35]Mansell and Matulionyte (n 18).
[36]Ibid.
[37]eSafety Commissioner (n 28).
[38]Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) sch 1 (Criminal Code) s 474.17A(1)–(2).
[39]Lavelle (n 18).
[40]Online Safety and Other Legislation Amendment (My Face, My Rights) Bill 2025 (Cth); David Pocock, 'New Bill to Protect Identity in Deepfake Future' (Media Release, 24 November 2025) <https://www.davidpocock.com.au/new_bill_to_protect_identity_in_deepfake_future>; Parliament of Australia, 'Online Safety and Other Legislation Amendment (My Face, My Rights) Bill 2025', Bills and Legislation (Web Page, accessed 28 October 2026) <https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=s1471>.
[41]Parliament of Australia (n 41).
[42]IP Australia (n 1); Intellectual Property Office (UK), 'Trade Mark UK00004455958' (n 4); Intellectual Property Office (UK), 'Trade Mark UK00004456266' (n 11).
[43]Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, opened for signature 20 March 1883, 828 UNTS 305 (as revised at Stockholm on 14 July 1967 and entered into force on 26 April 1970) art 4(C)(1).