Swifts

Taylor Swift is entering her trademark era.

The global pop star’s company, TAS Rights Management, filed three new trademark applications last week, per the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. Two of the applications relate to soundbites of her voice, saying the phrases “Hey, it’s Taylor Swift” and “Hey, it’s Taylor.” The other is a well-known image of Swift, often representative of her recent Eras tour, featuring the 36-year-old onstage, holding her pink guitar and dressed in a shimmering bodysuit.

The push to lock down her public image comes at a time when many high-profile celebrities have called for regulations against unauthorized AI-generated content. Matthew McConaughey was one of the first Hollywood A-listers to leverage trademark law as an extra layer of protection.

In January, the “Interstellar” actor secured eight trademarks for his likeness, including images of him smiling and the iconic recording of him saying, “Alright, alright, alright,” from the 1993 movie “Dazed and Confused.”

“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,” the actor told the Wall Street Journal in January. “We want to create a clear perimeter around ownership with consent and attribution the norm in an AI world.”

Registering a trademark for a celebrity’s speaking voice to defend against the prospect of AI-voice generation is a novel legal approach that has not yet been tested in court. Representatives for Swift did not respond to a request for comment on the intent of the recently filed trademarks. But Josh Gerben, one of the first attorneys to report Swift’s latest legal moves, said this is one of the growing gaps in intellectual property protection that AI can exploit.

Before AI infiltrated the internet, musicians, like Swift, would typically rely on copyright law to help prevent the unauthorized use and distribution of their music, while right to publicity laws would protect them from unlawful commercial use of their likeness. But with AI, users can manipulate people’s voices and images to sing or say practically anything.

So if McConaughey has a trademark on his voice saying a phrase, then theoretically any AI-generated voice that sounds similar to it could be considered a violation of that trademark, according to Gerben.

“If they have this trademark protection in place, then the [AI] platforms can’t use that same voice to create new content,” Gerben said. “Every celebrity would essentially have to go and do the same thing, but it’s trying to cut this off at the source as much as possible.”

Variety first reported news of Swift’s trademark filing.

As one of the most popular musicians, Swift has dealt with her share of unauthorized AI-generated content. She was previously one of the many female celebrities whose likeness was among several of Meta’s AI chatbot virtual celebrities. The illicit chatbots allegedly produced pornographic images. Before the 2024 presidential election, Donald Trump also shared AI-generated images of Swift falsely suggesting that she had endorsed him, including one of her dressed as Uncle Sam with the words, “Taylor wants you to vote for Donald Trump.”

Because Swift is such a recognizable public figure, Luke Arrigoni, the chief executive of Loti AI, a tech company that focuses on likeness protection, said trademark filings like these aren’t merely defensive but rather a setup for a long-term protective infrastructure.

“By locking down these trademarks now, she’s ensuring that if a brand wants to use a ‘Swift-like’ AI voice in 2027, they’ll have to go through her authorized gates or face federal trademark infringement,” Arrigoni said in a statement. “She’s essentially putting a price tag on her digital self, and that’s exactly where the entire talent industry needs to go to survive.”

In a busy opening period, neither side could really establish an early foothold on the game.

Cliftonville went close midway through the half when Jonny Addis’ low free-kick from just outside the penalty area brushed the outside of the side netting on its way past.

As the Reds began to gain some form of dominance, Rory Hale’s inch-perfect through ball sent Brian Healy clear of the Dungannon rearguard but Danny Wallace recovered superbly to poke the ball behind for a corner at full stretch.

Dungannon posed little threat to the Cliftonville goal in the opening 45 minutes with Gael Bigirimana’s long-range shot straight at Reds keeper PJ Morrison.

The Swifts first clear-cut opening of the game came just after the hour mark when Dillon’s pinpoint ball from midfield sent full-back Shea Gordon clear behind the Cliftonville defence, but his shot lacked conviction and Morrison was able to save with his outstretched foot.

At the other end, Rory Hale created half a yard of space before finding Liam McStravick with a pass, but the attacker’s tame shot was always straight at Declan Dunne.

Dungannon spurned another big opening late on as Gordon once again got himself into an advanced position and when his initial shocked was saved by Morrison, the ball bounced up but substitute Andrew Mitchell could only loop his header onto the top of the net.

Rodney McAree’s side enjoyed their best spell at the start of extra-time and were rewarded on 98 minutes when Mitchell cut the ball back from the right-hand side of the penalty area into the path of the in-rushing Kealan Dillon, who smashed a shot high into the net past Morrison.

Cliftonville had penalty appeals waved away in the second period of extra time after referee Morrison adjudged that Cahal McGinty had blocked Keevan Hawthorne’s low cross with his body rather than a hand.

But there was one final twist in stoppage time at the end of extra time as Hawthorne’s corner was bundled home at the near post via a combination of Joe Sheridan and defender Danny Wallace with what proved the last action of the game.

In the penalty shootout, Dungannon scored all four of their penalties while Sheridan saw his effort saved and Wilson dragged his effort wide of the post.