Lady Gaga, Surfboards, and a $100 Million Trademark Lawsuit: What Entrepreneurs Can Learn About Protecting Their Brands
By Kate Sullivan | Founder & Patent Attorney, Black Dog Law
I absolutely love Lady Gaga. Her music, her creativity, her acting. And can we talk about her performance in American Horror Story: Hotel? Fantastic.
So when I learned that Gaga was involved in a trademark dispute reportedly seeking $100 million over her MAYHEM album, concert merchandise, and a surfboard company, both my inner fan and intellectual property attorney were intrigued.
Beyond the celebrity headlines, this dispute raises important questions for entrepreneurs: Can two businesses use the same trademark? When should you enforce your rights? And when might protecting your brand cost more than the protection is worth?
Lady Gaga Versus Lost Surfboards: What Happened?
In March 2025, Lost International, the company behind Lost Surfboards, sued Lady Gaga and her merchandising partner, Bravado International, over the use of MAYHEM in connection with Gaga’s album, tour, and merchandise.
Lost has used MAYHEM branding for decades and owns a federal standard-character trademark registration for apparel, including T-shirts, jackets, and hats. Lost alleged infringement and reportedly sought $100 million in damages.
In August 2026, a federal judge dismissed the case with prejudice, applying a First Amendment framework for certain expressive trademark uses. Lost appealed the dismissal. The district court’s ruling did not resolve an ordinary likelihood-of-confusion analysis on the merits.
Can Two Businesses Legally Use the Same Trademark?
Absolutely. But it depends.
One of the most common misconceptions I encounter is that obtaining a federal trademark registration means you own a word or phrase outright. You don’t.
Imagine a company selling dog treats under the hypothetical name GOOD DOG. Could another business use GOOD DOG for accounting services? Potentially. Dog treats and accounting services aren’t exactly competing for the same customers.
But what if another company begins selling GOOD DOG-branded pet accessories, clothing, or grooming products? Now things become more complicated.
Trademark infringement generally depends on whether consumers are likely to believe goods or services come from the same source or are affiliated. Courts consider multiple factors, including similarity of marks, relatedness of goods or services, marketing channels, and other marketplace circumstances. Trademark classes are administrative categories, not rigid boundaries around enforceable rights.
That’s why trademark clearance involves more than searching for identical names or checking whether a particular class is available. GOOD DOG is only a hypothetical illustration, not an assessment of that name’s actual availability or registrability.
Why Does Gaga’s Merchandise Matter?
Surfboards and music albums are pretty different products. Surfboards and concert merchandise, particularly clothing? That’s a more interesting question.
Lost’s MAYHEM registration covers clothing in standard characters, meaning the wording is not limited to one particular font or logo design. A stylized-logo registration, by contrast, protects the mark as depicted. Depending on the circumstances, a business may benefit from protecting its wording, its design, or both.
But Gaga’s case adds another layer: artistic expression. Under Rogers v. Grimaldi, certain uses of trademarks in expressive works may receive First Amendment protection. In Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC (2023), the Supreme Court clarified that the Rogers framework does not apply when the defendant uses the challenged designation as a trademark identifying the source of its own goods.
The Gaga court applied Rogers and found Lost had not sufficiently alleged explicitly misleading use. That does not establish that all artist merchandise is immune from trademark claims. When is a word on a sweatshirt an artistic reference, and when is it functioning as a trademark? That’s a key distinction worth watching as the appeal proceeds.
What Can Taylor Swift Teach Us About IP Strategy?
While we’re talking about entertainers and trademarks, it’s hard not to mention Taylor Swift. Her team has pursued an extensive trademark portfolio relating to her name, music, tours, and merchandise. It’s a useful example of identifying valuable brand assets before opportunities arise.
Her intellectual property strategy extends beyond trademarks. The Taylor’s Version recordings and her 2025 acquisition of her original master recordings illustrate how ownership and control of creative assets can shape a business. Copyrights in sound recordings and trademarks protect different interests, but the planning lesson is similar: IP strategy isn’t just about what you’ve created. It’s about where your business might go next.
You don’t need Taylor Swift’s resources to think that way. A practical IP strategy for a growing business can begin with a well-chosen name, a clearance review, and a plan for future products and services.
Is the Publicity Worth the Cost of Litigation?
There’s another business consideration in Gaga’s case that interests me. A lawsuit against one of the world’s most recognizable entertainers was likely to attract substantial media attention. That exposure might introduce Lost’s MAYHEM brand to new customers. But would any resulting benefit outweigh the cost of litigation?
After the dismissal, Gaga and her merchandising partners requested approximately $232,000 in attorneys’ fees. Lost opposed the request. A request is not an award, and the existence of the request doesn’t establish Lost’s own legal expenses. Under federal trademark law, a prevailing party may recover reasonable attorneys’ fees in an exceptional case; losing alone does not automatically meet that standard.
We don’t know whether publicity factored into Lost’s decision to sue. It may have legitimate reasons to pursue the claim and appeal. Still, the situation raises a question every business owner should consider: Just because you have a legal argument, does pursuing it make business sense?
Sometimes litigation is necessary. In other circumstances, investigation, a targeted demand, negotiated coexistence, or licensing may better serve the business. Each option carries its own risks, and not every option is appropriate for every dispute.
Three Lessons for Entrepreneurs
1. Clear your brand before investing heavily in it.
An available LLC name, domain, or social media handle doesn’t necessarily mean you have the legal right to use that name. Evaluate potentially conflicting rights before spending heavily on inventory, packaging, or marketing.
2. Protect your brand with the future in mind.
Will you eventually offer merchandise, expand into new markets, license your brand, or introduce additional products? Your protection strategy should consider those possibilities without assuming that every expansion can be reserved in advance.
3. Enforce your rights strategically, not emotionally.
Business owners put enormous time, money, and personal energy into their brands. I understand why a potentially conflicting use can feel personal. But the strength of your rights, likely harm, cost, business disruption, and realistic remedies should guide your response. Not every dispute needs to become a lawsuit.
Good IP Strategy Is Good Business Strategy
As much as I love Lady Gaga, I appreciate why a company that has spent decades developing its brand would want to protect its trademark rights. And Taylor Swift’s approach shows why intellectual property deserves a place in long-term business planning.
At Black Dog Law, I want clients to understand not only what rights they may have, but how those rights support their broader goals. The goal isn’t simply to get a registration or win a legal argument. It’s to build something valuable, protect it thoughtfully, and make decisions that help your business succeed.
And hopefully avoid a little unnecessary MAYHEM along the way.
Protecting Your Brand Starts With a Strategy
Whether you’re choosing a name, expanding an established brand, or evaluating a possible conflict, Black Dog Law’s trademark services can help you assess your options and develop a practical strategy.
This article provides general educational information and is not legal advice. Trademark rights and enforcement questions depend on the particular facts and applicable law.