Lady Gaga Wins ‘Mayhem’ Trademark Battle with Surfboard Brand

Lady Gaga has defeated a trademark lawsuit over her album Mayhem, with a federal judge ruling that the pop star’s use of the common word is protected by the First Amendment.

U.S. District Judge Fernando M. Olguin dismissed the lawsuit filed by Lost Surfboards on Tuesday, Aug. 18, finding that the company had failed to show that Lady Gaga’s album title was explicitly misleading or likely to make consumers believe the music was connected to the surfboard business.

The decision could have significant implications for artists using trademarked words in creative works.

Lady Gaga’s ‘Mayhem’ Album Survives Trademark Lawsuit

Lost Surfboards had sued Lady Gaga, whose real name is Stefani Germanotta, arguing that her use of Mayhem infringed its trademark rights.

The company has sold surfboards under the Mayhem name since the 1980s and argued that Gaga’s album branding, including a stylized red logo, was sufficiently similar to its own branding to confuse consumers.

Lost accused the singer of showing a “blatant disregard” for its trademark rights and claimed that she had effectively appropriated the Mayhem name without permission.

Gaga’s legal team strongly disagreed.

Her lawyers argued the lawsuit was an attempt to gain leverage from using an ordinary dictionary word in an artistic work. They also pointed out that Lost had failed to identify a single consumer who actually believed Gaga’s album was associated with the surfboard company.

Now, the judge has sided with Lady Gaga.

First Amendment Protects Gaga’s Album Title

Judge Olguin’s ruling centered on the First Amendment and a longstanding legal principle known as the Rogers test.

The test gives expressive works, including songs, films, books, and album titles, greater protection when they use trademarks.

A trademark owner generally cannot win simply by showing that its mark appears in a creative work. It must establish circumstances such as an explicitly misleading representation or a use that is essentially unrelated to the artistic work.

Olguin found that Lost had not cleared that legal hurdle.

The judge concluded that the allegations did not establish an explicit claim that Lost was the source of Gaga’s work or that the singer had deliberately misrepresented an association.

He also emphasized that album titles are expressive works protected by constitutional free-speech principles.

Gaga Already Had an Earlier Court Victory

Tuesday’s dismissal was not Gaga’s first win in the dispute.

In December, Olguin rejected Lost’s request for an injunction that would have prevented Gaga from continuing to use the Mayhem name while the lawsuit proceeded.

That decision allowed the singer to continue promoting and selling products connected with the album.

The latest ruling goes considerably further by ending the case at the district-court level.

Lost can still appeal the decision to a federal appeals court.

Why the ‘Mayhem’ Case Matters for Music

The dispute highlights a recurring tension between trademark law and artistic freedom.

Trademark owners have legitimate rights to prevent businesses from misleading consumers, but courts have historically been cautious about allowing those rights to restrict creative expression.

One famous example involved Mattel’s lawsuit over Aqua’s song “Barbie Girl.” A federal appeals court ultimately ruled for the musicians, finding that the use of the trademark in the song was protected expression rather than a misleading commercial endorsement.

Gaga’s victory follows that broader legal tradition.

For the Grammy-winning superstar, the ruling means Mayhem can continue to exist not only as an album title but as part of the visual and commercial identity surrounding one of her biggest recent musical eras.

And for Lost Surfboards, the battle is not necessarily finished, but its next move will have to come through an appeal.