Taylor Swift is taking a new step to protect her identity. Not through music, but through trademarks.
In filings dated April 24, Swift’s company, TAS Rights Management, submitted three trademark applications in the United States, signaling what experts see as a growing effort by artists to guard against the misuse of artificial intelligence.
Two of the filings focus on audio. They cover short voice clips of Swift saying: “Hey, it’s Taylor Swift” and “Hey, it’s Taylor.” The third filing targets a specific visual, a detailed image of Swift performing on stage, holding a pink guitar and wearing a multi-colored bodysuit.
The move comes as AI-generated content continues to blur the line between what’s real and what’s fake.
Swift has been a frequent target of deepfakes and manipulated media, including explicit images and misleading political content shared online. The filings appear designed to give Swift more control over how her voice and likeness are used, especially in cases where AI tools recreate them without her permission.
A strategy borrowed and expanded
Swift is not alone. Actor Matthew McConaughey previously pursued a similar approach, securing trademarks tied to his voice and image.
“My team and I want to know that when my voice or likeness is ever used, it’s because I approved and signed off on it. We want to create a clear perimeter around ownership with consent and attribution the norm in an AI world,” said Matthew McConaughey, according to The Guardian.
Legal experts say this “trademark yourself” strategy could offer something traditional laws struggle to provide. Historically, trademarks have not been used to protect a person’s voice or general likeness. Instead, copyright and “right of publicity” laws have handled those areas. But AI is changing that landscape.
“Attempting to register a celebrity’s spoken voice is a new use of trademark registration that has not been tested in court before,” intellectual property attorney Josh Gerben noted in a blog post.
“By registering specific phrases tied to her voice, Swift could potentially challenge not only identical reproductions, but also imitations that are ‘confusingly similar’, a key standard in trademark law,” he added.
If approved, the filings could give Swift new legal tools to fight AI-generated content. “Theoretically, if a lawsuit were to be filed over an AI using Swift’s voice, she could claim that any use of her voice that sounds like the registered trademark violates her trademark rights,” Gerben explained. He added that the same logic could apply to visuals resembling her signature stage look.
Swift’s filings reflect a broader trend in the entertainment industry, where public figures are increasingly treating their voices and likenesses as brand assets, similar to logos or slogans. While it remains unclear how courts will rule on such cases, the filings could help shape how intellectual property law adapts to the fast-moving world of AI.
Also read: The best AI detectors can help teams spot synthetic text, though no tool can identify AI-generated content with perfect accuracy.