LIGHTING THE LIT FUSE

• Florida artist Kimberly Marasco launches a new legal salvo, accusing Taylor Swift and top collaborators of pilfering her poetry for multiple hit songs.
• The lawsuit expands to name Jack Antonoff, Aaron Dessner, Universal Music Group, and Republic Records, raising the stakes in an already fiery copyright battle.
• With a prior case tossed for procedural missteps, Marasco is back—this time demanding $25 million and zeroing in on lyrics, choreography, and creative content.

By Samuel Lopez – USA Herald

Follow us on X @RealUSAHerald

MIAMI, FL – In what could be one of the most closely watched copyright showdowns of 2025, Taylor Swift is once again the center of a legal storm. Florida-based poet and self-described author Kimberly Marasco has filed a fresh federal lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida, alleging that Swift, along with her collaborators and music labels, copied substantial portions of Marasco’s poetry for multiple high-profile songs.

Filed on February 28, 2025, under case number 2:2025cv14067, the complaint accuses Swift of using original copyrighted material—both lyrical and thematic—and turning it into chart-topping music without authorization or compensation. Marasco, representing herself in the case, is demanding $25 million in damages under the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 501.

Presiding over the lawsuit is U.S. District Judge Jose E. Martinez. Also named as defendants are acclaimed producers Jack Antonoff and Aaron Dessner, along with music industry giants Universal Music Group, Inc., and Republic Records.

“What makes this lawsuit unique is not just the celebrity name at the center—but the broader implications for intellectual property rights in music,” – Samuel Lopez, USA Herald.

BACK WITH A VENGEANCE

This isn’t Marasco’s first rodeo. In April 2024, she filed an earlier suit against Swift, which was ultimately dismissed by Judge Aileen Cannon for failure to properly serve the complaint. That case also named Swift’s production company, Taylor Swift Productions, Inc., which is not included in the newly filed action.

In her new lawsuit, Marasco escalates her claims—now implicating additional songs like Who’s Afraid of Little Old Me? and I Can Do It With a Broken Heart from Swift’s latest album The Tortured Poets Department. She also revives allegations related to The Man (from Lover) and Midnight Rain (from Midnights).

THE CO-WRITERS IN THE CROSSFIRE

Jack Antonoff and Aaron Dessner, two of Swift’s most prolific collaborators, are directly implicated. According to the complaint, their songwriting contributions helped shape songs that allegedly mirror Marasco’s original poems and themes. Antonoff co-wrote Illicit Affairs and Down Bad, while Dessner’s credits include Hoax and Death by a Thousand Cuts.

Marasco alleges a “pattern of unauthorized use” and claims that the songs contain “identifiable lines and motifs”derived from her unpublished and self-published poetry. Exhibits attached to the complaint reportedly attempt to draw lyrical comparisons between her work and the chart-toppers.

Although choreographic similarities are also alleged, those elements remain harder to litigate without video evidence or expert analysis, which may be pivotal should the case proceed to discovery or trial.

PROCEDURAL HURDLES PERSIST

Despite the high-profile nature of the lawsuit, Marasco continues to face challenges related to court procedure. In the previous case, Judge Cannon struck her filings for violating local rules, suggesting a steep learning curve for the pro se litigant. Nonetheless, Marasco has shown persistence, filing the new action independently (without a lawyer) and upping the ante with a much larger demand for damages.

Defendants, once served, will have 21 days to respond. Legal observers anticipate a swift move by Swift’s legal team to file a motion to dismiss, likely arguing lack of substantial similarity or failure to state a claim under the copyright statute.

WHAT’S NEXT?

While copyright lawsuits in the music industry are far from rare, most never make it to trial. Courts typically assess two key elements: access and substantial similarity. Given Swift’s prominence, access might be presumed—but proving substantial similarity, particularly of protectable elements, remains a high bar.

As with past lawsuits involving Swift—including the widely covered Shake It Off litigation—the outcome may turn on expert reports, musical analyses, and depositions regarding the songwriting process.

And then there’s the optics. Swift, known for carefully cultivating her public image, now finds herself the target of yet another lawsuit. Whether the court or public sees this as coincidence, homage, or infringement will be a narrative worth tracking.

FACT CHECK & DOCUMENT LINKS

• Case Docket – Marasco v. Swift et al – Justia
• U.S. Copyright Law – 17 U.S.C. § 501
• Judge Jose E. Martinez – Biographical Information
• Taylor Swift’s Album – The Tortured Poets Department
• Court Rules & Forms – U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Want to dig deeper?
Join me on Patreon – Legal Insights and Strategies by Samuel Lopez for exclusive legal templates, copyright case analyses, and behind-the-scenes strategy guides on high-stakes music litigation.