Lady Gaga Scores Legal Win in ‘Mayhem’ Trademark Battle

Lady Gaga has won dismissal of a trademark lawsuit brought by Lost Surfboards over her use of the name “Mayhem” for her album, tour and merchandise. U.S. District Judge Fernando M. Olguin dismissed the company’s claims with prejudice Tuesday, finding that Lost had not plausibly alleged that Gaga’s use of the name explicitly misled consumers into believing the surf brand was connected to her work.

Lost International, the company behind Lost Surfboards, sued Gaga in March 2025, arguing that it had used the Mayhem name for decades and owned trademark rights covering clothing and other merchandise. The company claimed Gaga’s use of Mayhem, including on apparel sold in connection with the album and tour, was likely to create confusion between the two brands.

Gaga’s attorneys argued that her use of the name was protected by the First Amendment because Mayhem is the title of an expressive work. The dispute turned largely on the Rogers test, a legal standard courts use in some trademark cases involving artistic expression.

Under that test, trademark protection generally gives way when a name or mark has artistic relevance to a creative work unless its use explicitly misleads consumers about who created, sponsored, or endorsed it. Olguin found that Lost had not identified an affirmative statement or other representation by Gaga suggesting the surf company was connected to the album.

The judge also rejected Lost’s argument that the sale of Mayhem merchandise changed the analysis. Although Lost owns trademark rights covering apparel, the court treated Gaga’s clothing and other promotional products as tied to the broader artistic project.

The ruling follows Olguin’s December decision denying Lost a preliminary injunctionpreliminary injunctionA preliminary injunction is a temporary court order issued before a case is finally decided that requires a party to take or stop an action while the litigation continues. Federal courts generally consider the likelihood of success, irreparable harm, the balance of equities, and the public interest before granting one.Read more → that would have restricted Gaga’s use of the name while the lawsuit proceeded. At the time, the judge concluded that Lost had not shown it was likely to succeed on its trademark claims.

Lost later amended its lawsuit, but Olguin found that the company’s latest allegations did not cure the problems identified earlier. The judge declined to give Lost another opportunity to amend, noting that it had already been given multiple chances to state viable claims.

Gaga’s attorneys had also argued that Lost could not identify a consumer who actually believed the singer’s album, tour, or merchandise was affiliated with the surf company. The court ultimately based the dismissal on Lost’s failure to plausibly allege the kind of explicit misrepresentation required under the First Amendment standard.

Because the case was dismissed with prejudice, Lost cannot simply amend the complaint again and pursue the same claims in the trial court. Lost attorney Keith G. Bremer said the company disagrees with the ruling and intends to appeal.

Any appeal would move the dispute to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. For now, the dismissal ends Lost’s trademark claims against Gaga at the trial court level.