Neilson Barnard / ANDRE DIAS NOBRE / AFP / Aldara Zarraoa / Getty Images Entertainment via Getty Images
By
Nadia Santiago
Kimberly Marasco, a self-published poet from Florida who defended herself in court, alleges that Taylor Swift lifted phrases, themes, and metaphors from about 11 of her poems in songs on 5 albums, from Lover to Department of Victimized Poets.
On Monday, US District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case. Marasco’s poetry, he ruled, “does not contain protected speech” and reaches for “many ideas, metaphors, contexts and themes.” Copyright protects the specific form of writing, not ideas, common metaphors, or short phrases under it.
This decision came down to one of the oldest principles in copyright law. It protects a certain way in which an artist expresses something. The basic idea remains free for everyone to use. Two writers can both write about heartbreak, gaslighting, or a secret story. What binds the law is the specific language and structure, not the subject matter itself.
Kimberly Marasco, a self-published poet based in Florida, filed the lawsuit against herself without a lawyer. He said Swift copied about 11 of his poems in songs including “Man,” “Illegal Stories,” “My Tears Ricochet,” and “Fortnight,” which includes Lover, Folklore, Evermore, Midnights, and Department of Victimized Poets.
US District Judge Aileen Cannon, in the Southern District of Florida, ruled that the poems “do not constitute protectable speech” and include “many ideas, metaphors, contexts and themes.” The alleged overlap, he found, comes down to basic ideas like the idea of ​​gaslighting, common metaphors, and single words and short phrases, none of which are covered by copyright. He also ruled that Marasco did not clearly show that Swift ever had access to his work.
Swift’s lawyers had called the claims “absurd,” “useless,” and “stupid and abusive.” It was Marasco’s second suit against parties related to Swift. The previous case was dismissed in September 2025 after he failed to serve Swift in time.
The dismissal was filed with prejudice, meaning Marasco cannot file similar claims. He says he plans to appeal the case.
Thanks for reading. Follow Thought Catalog on Facebook for more stories like this, or check out our website.