Taylor Swift's Lawyers Call Trademark Suit 'Meritless' at Trial
The pop star's legal team argues the case lacks merit and asks a federal court to dismiss Maren Wade's trademark infringement lawsuit.
Headline and summary written by an AI model from the linked articles; not reviewed by a person. How this was made
This story has stopped developing; this page is its permanent record. More from that day
The odds
Each tick is a source publishing on this story
Price data
| Time | Chance of yes |
|---|---|
| now | 1% |
| 4 Oct, 01:07 UTC | 1% |
| 4 Oct, 00:15 UTC | 2% |
| 3 Oct, 23:16 UTC | 2% |
| 3 Oct, 21:43 UTC | 2% |
| 3 Oct, 20:17 UTC | 1% |
| 3 Oct, 19:09 UTC | 2% |
| 3 Oct, 17:49 UTC | 2% |
| 3 Oct, 14:13 UTC | 1% |
| 3 Oct, 11:47 UTC | 2% |
| 3 Oct, 11:21 UTC | 1% |
| 3 Oct, 10:10 UTC | 2% |
| 3 Oct, 07:57 UTC | 1% |
| 3 Oct, 07:13 UTC | 2% |
| 3 Oct, 04:24 UTC | 1% |
| 3 Oct, 02:09 UTC | 2% |
| 2 Oct, 17:11 UTC | 1% |
| 2 Oct, 04:28 UTC | 2% |
| 2 Oct, 01:33 UTC | 2% |
| 2 Oct, 01:20 UTC | 1% |
| 2 Oct, 00:03 UTC | 2% |
| 1 Oct, 23:38 UTC | 1% |
| 1 Oct, 14:21 UTC | 2% |
| 1 Oct, 07:09 UTC | 1% |
| 1 Oct, 05:40 UTC | 2% |
| 1 Oct, 05:20 UTC | 2% |
| 1 Oct, 03:41 UTC | 1% |
| 1 Oct, 02:57 UTC | 2% |
| 30 Sept, 23:39 UTC | 3% |
| 30 Sept, 22:37 UTC | 2% |
| 30 Sept, 17:28 UTC | 3% |
| 30 Sept, 16:36 UTC | 2% |
| 30 Sept, 16:09 UTC | 5% |
| 30 Sept, 14:50 UTC | 4% |
| 30 Sept, 13:57 UTC | 5% |
| 30 Sept, 11:03 UTC | 4% |
| 30 Sept, 07:44 UTC | 1% |
| 30 Sept, 04:13 UTC | 4% |
| 30 Sept, 01:44 UTC | 2% |
| 29 Sept, 22:45 UTC | 3% |
| 29 Sept, 15:08 UTC | 4% |
| 29 Sept, 13:35 UTC | 3% |
| 29 Sept, 12:48 UTC | 3% |
| 29 Sept, 07:02 UTC | 4% |
| 29 Sept, 05:53 UTC | 5% |
| 28 Sept, 19:18 UTC | 6% |
| 28 Sept, 14:06 UTC | 5% |
| 28 Sept, 13:30 UTC | 6% |
| 28 Sept, 13:04 UTC | 7% |
| 28 Sept, 12:04 UTC | 9% |
| 28 Sept, 11:17 UTC | 12% |
| 28 Sept, 10:35 UTC | 8% |
| 28 Sept, 08:38 UTC | 10% |
| 28 Sept, 07:26 UTC | 9% |
| 28 Sept, 06:36 UTC | 15% |
| 28 Sept, 05:03 UTC | 13% |
| 28 Sept, 04:46 UTC | 11% |
| 28 Sept, 04:15 UTC | 12% |
| 28 Sept, 03:34 UTC | 14% |
| 28 Sept, 02:48 UTC | 16% |
| 28 Sept, 02:25 UTC | 15% |
| 28 Sept, 01:36 UTC | 19% |
| 28 Sept, 01:28 UTC | 16% |
| 28 Sept, 00:22 UTC | 13% |
| 27 Sept, 23:37 UTC | 18% |
| 27 Sept, 21:43 UTC | 17% |
| 27 Sept, 20:36 UTC | 12% |
| 27 Sept, 19:59 UTC | 13% |
| 27 Sept, 18:51 UTC | 16% |
| 27 Sept, 18:20 UTC | 12% |
| 27 Sept, 17:31 UTC | 19% |
| 27 Sept, 17:06 UTC | 16% |
| 27 Sept, 16:52 UTC | 16% |
| 27 Sept, 16:23 UTC | 17% |
| 27 Sept, 15:52 UTC | 16% |
| 27 Sept, 15:24 UTC | 14% |
| 27 Sept, 14:38 UTC | 23% |
| 27 Sept, 14:03 UTC | 13% |
| 27 Sept, 09:30 UTC | 27% |
| 27 Sept, 08:15 UTC | 35% |
| 27 Sept, 06:54 UTC | 31% |
| 27 Sept, 05:36 UTC | 33% |
| 27 Sept, 04:25 UTC | 25% |
| 27 Sept, 03:46 UTC | 30% |
| 27 Sept, 03:19 UTC | 32% |
| 27 Sept, 02:58 UTC | 32% |
| 27 Sept, 01:17 UTC | 29% |
| 27 Sept, 00:42 UTC | 31% |
| 26 Sept, 23:34 UTC | 30% |
| 26 Sept, 23:25 UTC | 35% |
| 26 Sept, 22:14 UTC | 30% |
| 26 Sept, 19:56 UTC | 27% |
| 26 Sept, 19:16 UTC | 30% |
| 26 Sept, 18:59 UTC | 24% |
| 26 Sept, 18:26 UTC | 30% |
| 26 Sept, 17:23 UTC | 27% |
| 26 Sept, 16:48 UTC | 25% |
| 26 Sept, 16:03 UTC | 28% |
| 26 Sept, 15:31 UTC | 26% |
| 26 Sept, 15:15 UTC | 25% |
| 26 Sept, 14:37 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 14:10 UTC | 16% |
| 26 Sept, 13:50 UTC | 15% |
| 26 Sept, 13:06 UTC | 26% |
| 26 Sept, 10:50 UTC | 25% |
| 26 Sept, 08:02 UTC | 26% |
| 26 Sept, 06:40 UTC | 18% |
| 26 Sept, 06:25 UTC | 21% |
| 26 Sept, 05:08 UTC | 24% |
| 26 Sept, 04:36 UTC | 23% |
| 26 Sept, 03:53 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 03:16 UTC | 17% |
| 26 Sept, 02:24 UTC | 22% |
| 26 Sept, 01:37 UTC | 23% |
| 26 Sept, 00:56 UTC | 25% |
| 25 Sept, 23:08 UTC | 26% |
| 25 Sept, 22:54 UTC | 27% |
| 25 Sept, 22:22 UTC | 25% |
| 25 Sept, 21:34 UTC | 27% |
| 25 Sept, 21:27 UTC | 27% |
| 25 Sept, 20:25 UTC | 36% |
| 25 Sept, 19:53 UTC | 29% |
| 25 Sept, 19:25 UTC | 32% |
| 25 Sept, 18:43 UTC | 37% |
| 25 Sept, 18:14 UTC | 39% |
| 25 Sept, 17:34 UTC | 42% |
| 25 Sept, 17:27 UTC | 33% |
| 25 Sept, 16:58 UTC | 32% |
| 25 Sept, 16:19 UTC | 30% |
| 25 Sept, 15:57 UTC | 30% |
| 25 Sept, 14:54 UTC | 38% |
| 25 Sept, 14:25 UTC | 41% |
| 25 Sept, 13:54 UTC | 48% |
| 25 Sept, 13:11 UTC | 43% |
| 25 Sept, 12:38 UTC | 40% |
| 25 Sept, 11:48 UTC | 39% |
| 25 Sept, 11:04 UTC | 35% |
| 25 Sept, 10:57 UTC | 40% |
| 25 Sept, 07:49 UTC | 36% |
| 25 Sept, 07:14 UTC | 38% |
| 25 Sept, 06:54 UTC | 37% |
| 25 Sept, 06:17 UTC | 40% |
| 25 Sept, 05:43 UTC | 41% |
| 25 Sept, 05:24 UTC | 45% |
| 25 Sept, 04:35 UTC | 63% |
| 25 Sept, 04:11 UTC | 77% |
| 25 Sept, 03:50 UTC | 80% |
| 25 Sept, 03:24 UTC | 79% |
| 25 Sept, 01:46 UTC | 81% |
| 25 Sept, 00:59 UTC | 80% |
| 24 Sept, 23:39 UTC | 78% |
| 24 Sept, 22:24 UTC | 77% |
| 24 Sept, 21:46 UTC | 78% |
| 24 Sept, 20:24 UTC | 81% |
| 24 Sept, 19:56 UTC | 72% |
| 24 Sept, 19:17 UTC | 72% |
| 24 Sept, 18:41 UTC | 74% |
| 24 Sept, 17:42 UTC | 70% |
| 24 Sept, 17:27 UTC | 73% |
| 24 Sept, 16:18 UTC | 70% |
| 24 Sept, 15:25 UTC | 69% |
| 24 Sept, 14:18 UTC | 70% |
| 24 Sept, 13:03 UTC | 70% |
| 24 Sept, 12:42 UTC | 66% |
| 24 Sept, 04:01 UTC | 70% |
| 24 Sept, 03:13 UTC | 69% |
| 24 Sept, 02:05 UTC | 68% |
| 24 Sept, 01:08 UTC | 65% |
| 23 Sept, 23:27 UTC | 77% |
| 23 Sept, 22:55 UTC | 83% |
| 23 Sept, 22:20 UTC | 79% |
| 23 Sept, 21:43 UTC | 87% |
| 22 Sept, 20:42 UTC | 0% |
The story so far
2 publishers have covered this in 2 articles since 23 Sept 2026. Rolling Stone published first, on 23 September at 19:25 UTC; NME followed 14h 05m later. The most recent article, from NME, appeared on 24 September at 09:31 UTC.
Outlets reporting it: Rolling Stone, NME.
3 prediction markets price this story:
- Exactly Yes — resolved “No” on 6 Oct 2026. The market resolves to Yes if exactly four unique songs credited to Taylor Swift appear in the top four spots on the Billboard Hot 100 chart for the week of October 10, 2026. It resolves to No if that specific condition is not met. Readers often mistake the linked news story about her wedding ring as relevant to the resolution, but only the Billboard chart data determines the outcome.
- Taylor Swift — resolved “No” on 28 Sept 2026. The market resolves to Yes if Taylor Swift wins Artist of the Year at the 2026 MTV Video Music Awards. It resolves to No if she does not win that specific award. Readers often mistake the linked news story about her trademark lawsuit for the resolution criteria, but only the award result matters.
- Alexander McQueen — the market puts it at 2%, closing 31 Dec 2026. The market resolves to Yes if Taylor Swift is documented wearing an Alexander McQueen wedding dress during her first wedding ceremony with Travis Kelce while exchanging vows. It resolves to No if this specific event does not occur. Readers often mistake the source of truth, assuming any public appearance or casual photo counts instead of requiring documentation from the actual wedding ceremony.
Odds are the market's probability that the outcome happens, updated every few minutes. They are information about what traders expect, not a forecast we make and not investment advice.
Sources
Every article we clustered into this story. Headlines link to the publisher.
Related prediction markets
Linked by software because they are about the same subject. Most ask a different question from the one this story reports, so read each market's own question. How often the link is right
- Resolved Exactly Yes No 32d ago
The market favoured No at 99% a day out, and it won. How often it's right
Wrong market?
- Resolved Taylor Swift No 40d ago
The market favoured No at 67% a day out, and it won. How often it's right
Wrong market?
- Kalshi Alexander McQueen 2%
Does the market have this right?
Wrong market?
Have your say
Your call. How does this end?
Free, no money involved. Calls are scored against the market's price when you make them, so backing an underdog that wins scores most. Leaderboard · Your calls
In this story
- Taylor Swift
- Maren Wade