## Facts

- TAS Rights Management, LLC held exclusive licensing and administrative rights to Taylor Swift’s name and likeness and owned or controlled registered marks including TAYLOR SWIFT and THE 1989 WORLD TOUR.
- Defendants, alleged to be itinerant vendors, sold and distributed unauthorized merchandise bearing Taylor Swift–related marks and imagery near concert venues during the tour.
- TAS asserted Lanham Act claims for trademark infringement, counterfeiting, false designation of origin/unfair competition, and dilution, plus Tennessee statutory claims related to deceptive trade practices and unauthorized commercial use of name/likeness.
- The court previously issued an order authorizing seizure of allegedly counterfeit goods in connection with the concert-venue sales.
- Defendants were personally served with the seizure order, verified complaint, and summonses but did not answer or otherwise appear.
- TAS moved for default judgment and a permanent injunction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2).

## Issues

1. Whether default judgment should be entered against defendants who were properly served but failed to plead or otherwise defend.
2. Whether the admitted allegations established violations of the Lanham Act and Tennessee law sufficient to justify permanent injunctive relief.
3. Whether equitable factors supported a permanent injunction, and what scope of injunctive relief was appropriate.

## Decision

- The court granted TAS’s motion for default judgment under Rule 55(b)(2).
- The court entered a permanent injunction under 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a) against further infringement, counterfeiting, and related unlawful uses of the Taylor Swift–related marks and publicity rights.
- The injunction barred defendants from manufacturing, distributing, advertising, offering for sale, or selling unauthorized merchandise bearing the marks (or confusingly similar designations) and from using Taylor Swift’s name or likeness in a way likely to cause confusion as to sponsorship or authorization.
- The court enforced the seizure-based relief as part of the anti-counterfeiting remedy framework.

## Legal Principles

- On default, well-pleaded factual allegations (other than damages) are treated as admitted and may establish liability and support equitable relief.
- Federal courts may enjoin violations of the Lanham Act under 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a), including infringement under § 1114 and false designation/dilution claims under § 1125(a) and (c).
- Permanent injunctive relief requires equitable justification, commonly assessed by (1) irreparable injury, (2) inadequacy of legal remedies, (3) balance of hardships, and (4) public interest.
- Counterfeit sales using registered marks near targeted events can support findings of likely confusion and harm to goodwill and quality control, supporting injunctive relief.
- Tennessee consumer-protection and personal-rights statutes may provide parallel liability where counterfeit sales mislead consumers and exploit an individual’s name or likeness for commercial gain.

## Conclusion

The court entered default judgment and permanently enjoined defendants from trafficking in unauthorized Taylor Swift–related merchandise and from confusing uses of the marks and likeness, based on admitted allegations of counterfeiting and related violations and a showing that equitable factors favored injunctive relief.


TAS Rights Mgmt., LLC v. Barber, No. 3:15-cv-00589, 2016 WL 55333 (M.D. Tenn. Jan. 4, 2016)