


Court Sides With Lady Gaga in Dispute Over ‘Mayhem’ Branding
The singer was sued by surf company Lost Surfboards in March
A court has ruled that Lady Gaga can continue to sell her ‘Mayhem’ merch, despite being sued by surf company Lost Surfboards.
The issue:
Lost Surfboards claimed that the ‘Mayhem’ logo used on Gaga’s merch infringed on their design, which has been part of the company’s branding since 1988.
Mayhem is the title of Gaga’s sixth solo studio album, which was released in March.
The ruling:
As per Digital Music News, Judge Fernando M. Olguin has ruled that the artist’s use of the word and the design doesn’t “explicitly mislead consumers” into thinking her merch is the surf company’s, or vice versa.
As a result, Lost Surfboards is unable to proceed with its trademark infringement claim.
It’s expected that Gaga’s lawyers will file a motion to dismiss; Lost’s attorneys may consider settling.
What they said:
Orin Snyder, Lady Gaga’s lead attorney (talking to Billboard): “[This] reaffirms that trademark law cannot be used to censor expressive works or chill artistic expression. We are pleased with the court’s clear and decisive ruling.”
Keith Bremer, Lost Surfboards’ attorney: “While we would have preferred a different outcome at this preliminary stage, we respect the court’s reasoning and look forward to continuing this process. Our commitment to protecting the ‘Mayhem’ trademark we’ve built over nearly four decades remains unchanged.”
A court has ruled that Lady Gaga can continue to sell her ‘Mayhem’ merch, despite being sued by surf company Lost Surfboards.
The issue:
Lost Surfboards claimed that the ‘Mayhem’ logo used on Gaga’s merch infringed on their design, which has been part of the company’s branding since 1988.
Mayhem is the title of Gaga’s sixth solo studio album, which was released in March.
The ruling:
As per Digital Music News, Judge Fernando M. Olguin has ruled that the artist’s use of the word and the design doesn’t “explicitly mislead consumers” into thinking her merch is the surf company’s, or vice versa.
As a result, Lost Surfboards is unable to proceed with its trademark infringement claim.
It’s expected that Gaga’s lawyers will file a motion to dismiss; Lost’s attorneys may consider settling.
What they said:
Orin Snyder, Lady Gaga’s lead attorney (talking to Billboard): “[This] reaffirms that trademark law cannot be used to censor expressive works or chill artistic expression. We are pleased with the court’s clear and decisive ruling.”
Keith Bremer, Lost Surfboards’ attorney: “While we would have preferred a different outcome at this preliminary stage, we respect the court’s reasoning and look forward to continuing this process. Our commitment to protecting the ‘Mayhem’ trademark we’ve built over nearly four decades remains unchanged.”
A court has ruled that Lady Gaga can continue to sell her ‘Mayhem’ merch, despite being sued by surf company Lost Surfboards.
The issue:
Lost Surfboards claimed that the ‘Mayhem’ logo used on Gaga’s merch infringed on their design, which has been part of the company’s branding since 1988.
Mayhem is the title of Gaga’s sixth solo studio album, which was released in March.
The ruling:
As per Digital Music News, Judge Fernando M. Olguin has ruled that the artist’s use of the word and the design doesn’t “explicitly mislead consumers” into thinking her merch is the surf company’s, or vice versa.
As a result, Lost Surfboards is unable to proceed with its trademark infringement claim.
It’s expected that Gaga’s lawyers will file a motion to dismiss; Lost’s attorneys may consider settling.
What they said:
Orin Snyder, Lady Gaga’s lead attorney (talking to Billboard): “[This] reaffirms that trademark law cannot be used to censor expressive works or chill artistic expression. We are pleased with the court’s clear and decisive ruling.”
Keith Bremer, Lost Surfboards’ attorney: “While we would have preferred a different outcome at this preliminary stage, we respect the court’s reasoning and look forward to continuing this process. Our commitment to protecting the ‘Mayhem’ trademark we’ve built over nearly four decades remains unchanged.”
👋 Disclosures & Transparency Block
This story was written with information from Digital Music News.
We covered it because it’s news of copyright infringement involving a high profile artist.
📨 Subscribe to NIF
Get news dropped in your inbox 👇
📨 Subscribe to NIF
Get news dropped in your inbox 👇
Related Articles

Policy & Legal
Feb 3, 2026
1 min read
NIVA Slams Live Nation Expansion, Proposed Demolition of Indie Venue
Milwaukee’s Miller High Life Theatre is at risk

Policy & Legal
Feb 3, 2026
1 min read
Universal Pictures and Warner Music Sued by Former Warner Employee
Jake Broido claims he is owed rights and royalties for his work on ‘Furious 7’ OST

Policy & Legal
Feb 2, 2026
1 min read
BMG Eyes Potential Concord Acquisition
Reports suggest the US company could be valued at $7 billion

NIVA Slams Live Nation Expansion, Proposed Demolition of Indie Venue
Milwaukee’s Miller High Life Theatre is at risk

Rod Yates
Policy
Feb 3, 2026

Universal Pictures and Warner Music Sued by Former Warner Employee
Jake Broido claims he is owed rights and royalties for his work on ‘Furious 7’ OST

Rod Yates
Policy
Feb 3, 2026

BMG Eyes Potential Concord Acquisition
Reports suggest the US company could be valued at $7 billion

Rod Yates
Policy
Feb 2, 2026

Spotify to Officially Launch Operations in Istanbul
The business will be led by MD Akshat Harbola

Rod Yates
Policy
Feb 2, 2026

DistroKid Weighs Potential Sale
Reports suggest a price tag of $2 billion

Rod Yates
Policy
Feb 2, 2026

Spotify, Major Labels Sue Anna’s Archive for $13 Trillion
Allege “brazen theft of... nearly all of the world’s commercial sound recordings”

Rod Yates
Policy
Jan 30, 2026



