The latest legal maneuver by Kimberly Marasco, a self-published Florida poet who filed a copyright appeal less than 48 hours after her second lawsuit against Taylor Swift was dismissed, the rigid boundaries of music copyright protection for publishers, songwriters, and rights holders. This case serves as a critical reminder that common metaphors, short phrases, and basic ideas cannot be owned, a principle that protects the creative ecosystem for Black music professionals and urban radio programmers who rely on the free flow of lyrical themes.
Second Defeat Confirms Copyright Limits
US District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed Marasco’s second amended complaint with prejudice on Monday, July 6, ruling that the alleged similarities between Marasco’s poems and Swift’s lyrics consisted entirely of unprotectable elements. The judge explicitly stated that concepts such as “gaslighting,” ubiquitous metaphors, and isolated words like “tears” or “rain” are “exactly the kind of material copyright law does not protect”. This dismissal prevents Marasco from filing the same suit again, effectively ending a legal battle that has persisted for over two years across two separate cases.
The songs at issue in this second suit included “Guilty as Sin?” and “My Tears Ricochet,” which Marasco claimed borrowed from her poems “Devious Minds,” “Scorpion,” and “Beams of Light”. However, Cannon agreed with Swift’s legal team that the lyrics contained only basic building blocks of the creation process, meaning that once unprotectable elements were filtered out, nothing remained to compare.
Appeal Filed Despite Legal Precedent
Despite the finality of the “with prejudice” ruling, Marasco lodged a notice of appeal on Tuesday, July 7, seeking to overturn the decision. Her legal team argues that the “striking” similarities between her works and Swift’s lyrics are so specific and unique that independent creation is unlikely, suggesting an inference of access. Yet, legal experts and the court system maintain that copyright suits of this nature rarely succeed because the law intrinsically links plot elements and literary devices to the general creation process.
Marasco previously sued Taylor Swift Productions in May 2024 regarding songs like “The Man” and “Illicit Affairs,” a case that Cannon also dismissed in September 2025 on identical grounds. Swift’s attorneys have characterized Marasco’s claims as “absurd and harassing,” noting that the overlaps are merely common observations. With both cases now collapsed, the legal precedent reinforces that songwriters and publishers cannot claim ownership over fundamental ideas, ensuring that the music industry remains open to diverse creative expression.
For editorial consideration and industry coverage inquiries, contact Radio Facts.
