Aileen Cannon Tells Taylor Swift to Wait to Respond to Copyright Lawsuit

Judge Aileen Cannon ordered pop star Taylor Swift and her co-defendants in a copyright lawsuit to not respond until everyone has been served.

Why It Matters

Kimberly Marasco, a Florida artist, filed a lawsuit in February against Swift, songwriters Jack Antonoff and Aaron Desner, Universal Music Group, Inc. and Republic Records for alleged copyright infringement.

Marasco filed a separate lawsuit against Swift and her production company last year, over which Cannon also presides. Cannon dismissed Swift from the case after Marasco failed to serve the lawsuit in a timely manner. The claims against her production company, Taylor Swift Productions, have not been dismissed.

What To Know

Cannon, who is presiding over the case, issued the order on Friday. She stated that “no Defendant shall file a response or answer until all Defendants in this action have been served.”

Cannon said this will help “better manage the orderly progress of the case.”

After all defendants have been served, they can submit a single joint response or separate answers within the time given to the last defendant to respond.

Taylor Swift at the MTV Video Music Awards on on September 12, 2023. zz/Patricia Schlein/STAR MAX/IPx
The case, originally assigned to Judge Jose Martinez, was transferred to Cannon last week. The order of transfer said that “good cause appearing that a transfer of this case is appropriate” because of the “related case” Cannon is presiding over.

Universal Music Group and Republic Records have returned executed summons.

A summons for Swift has been returned unexecuted. Earlier this month, an individual attempted service of the lawsuit at a California property. He said he could not find Swift or information about her whereabouts.

Who Is Kimberly Marasco?

Marasco is a published author of two poetry books. She is asking the court for more than $30 million in damages between the two lawsuits.

What Does Marasco’s Lawsuit Allege?

Marasco’s lawsuit alleges Swift’s songs and music videos have “creative elements” that copy her work without permission or credit. The lawsuit names songs and videos from several of Swift’s albums, including Lover and Folklore.

What Is the Status of the Case?

While the summons stage of Marasco’s second lawsuit continues, Cannon faces a key decision in the first lawsuit.

Cannon has yet to rule on a motion to dismiss the claims against Taylor Swift Productions, which was filed by the production company’s attorneys on January 21.

What People Are Saying

Kimberly Marasco, in a complaint filed in February: “As a direct and/or proximate result of the Defendants’ wrongful conduct, the Plaintiff has been irreparably harmed. Said injuries are continuing and will not abate in the future. Such reproduction and release were wholly unauthorized as it was without any license or consent of authority from the Plaintiff.”

What Happens Next

Summons have not been returned successfully for Swift, Antonoff and Dessner. Universal Music Group and Republic Records must wait until all defendants are served to file a response.