Cathay Home, a New York-based homeware company, recently abandoned its application for SWIFT HOME & Design following an opposition by TAS Rights Management LLC, the entity responsible for managing Taylor Swift’s intellectual property. 

The SWIFT HOME mark is not new to Cathay Home. In fact, the company owns an incontestable federal registration for SWIFT HOME & Design and has been using it in connection with bedding for over a decade (U.S. Reg. No. 5,043,780).  However, on May 5, 2025, Cathay Home filed an application for SWIFT HOME & Design (U.S. Serial No. 99/170,193).  Cathay Home’s application incorporates a different design—this time one Swift’s company took issue with, arguing it was too similar to the design mark that embodies Swift’s signature. 

Cathay Home’s Applied-for Mark	Swift’s Mark

On February 11, 2026, Swift initiated an opposition proceeding against SWIFT HOME citing her SWIFT and TAYLOR SWIFT marks, including those used in connection with bedding, the same goods offered by Cathay Home (Opposition No. 91305120).  Swift’s opposition made two main arguments.  First, SWIFT HOME creates a false association under Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act given the “stylized cursive font” used by Cathay Home’s mark is “highly similar to the manner in which ‘SWIFT’ is displayed” in Swift’s SWIFT and TAYLOR SWIFT marks (which use a “custom font intended to approximate the Artist’s handwriting”).  The opposition also asserts that “[c]onsumers would immediately recognize the name ‘SWIFT’ as identifying the Artist.”  Second, SWIFT HOME creates a likelihood of confusion as to the source of Cathay Home’s goods in violation of Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act because consumers are likely to mistakenly believe that Swift owns, sponsors, endorses, licenses, or is in some way affiliated with Cathay Home. 

As with most things Swift does, the opposition received a flurry of media attention including coverage by Rolling Stone, BBC, Billboard, Newsweek, and USA Today.  Following Swift’s opposition and the media storm that ensued, Cathay Home publicly stated that it would abandon its application (though the abandonment is not yet reflected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s records). 

As previously mentioned, Cathay Home’s is no stranger to co-existing with Swift, so what went wrong here?  Swift’s issue with Cathay Home’s application was not its use of “SWIFT,” which in addition to being Swift’s surname is also a common adjective meaning fast or quick.  Instead, the issue seemed to be  the use of SWIFT in a style substantially similar to that used by Swift.  Cathay Home’s existing registration for SWIFT HOME uses a different design, shown below.  This mark was also the subject of opposition proceedings by Swift (Opposition No. 86688660), however counsel for Cathay Home stated that the parties entered into a coexistence agreement regarding this mark. 

The dispute over SWIFT HOME teaches lessons for both trademark applicants and brand owners.  For applicants, conducting a full clearance search before seeking registration is a necessary step before moving forward with a new trademark. This is especially true if your brand shares a name with one of the most famous celebrities in the world.  Applicants also should consider the enforcement efforts of any relevant mark owners.  Swift has a history of enforcing her rights.  For example, in addition to SWIFT HOME, Swift has initiated opposition proceedings against other SWIFT-formative marks including SWIFTIE, SWIFTMOJI, SWIFT BUY, SWIFTY, and SWIFLIE.  Swift also has been known to send cease-and-desist letters to online retailers selling unauthorized Swift-themed products.  Where there is a strong history of enforcement, and particularly if there is a prior history between the parties as there is between Swift and Cathay Home, applicants should take such history into account when making branding decisions. 

While some may tell Swift “You Need to Calm Down,” her opposition to SWIFT HOME and her broader enforcement efforts serve as an example to brand owners of the importance of monitoring and enforcing your rights when appropriate.