Mayhem or Mayhem‑not? Trademark Trouble Spotlight
When a surf and streetwear brand called Lost International filed a federal trademark infringement lawsuit against Lady Gaga earlier this year, it caught the attention of both legal insiders and the public. But beneath the celebrity headlines lies a real lesson for startups, artists, apparel brands, and trademark owners: even a global pop star isn’t immune to trademark law.
The case—Lost International, LLC v. Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta (aka Lady Gaga)—offers a roadmap for how federal trademark rights can be enforced and what happens when brand confusion enters the marketplace. Whether you’re launching your first fashion line or expanding a growing ecommerce brand, this case shows why trademark searches, trademark registration strategies, and proactive enforcement matter more than ever.
What the Lady Gaga “MAYHEM” Lawsuit Teaches Brand Owners About Infringement, Confusion, and Enforcement
In this article, we’ll break down what happened, how the lawsuit illustrates common trademark issues under the Lanham Act, and what every business owner should take away when it comes to protecting their brand.
The Background: MAYHEM vs. MAYHEM
Lost International, a California-based surf and lifestyle company, owns several U.S. federal trademark registrations for “MAYHEM” in stylized fonts, primarily covering apparel and surfboards. According to the complaint filed in March 2025, Lost has used the MAYHEM mark in commerce for decades and registered it with the USPTO as early as 2013 for surfboards and 2015 for apparel.
Enter Lady Gaga.
In late 2023 and early 2024, Gaga began promoting her upcoming album titled MAYHEM and selling MAYHEM-branded apparel—including T-shirts, hoodies, and other merchandise—through official channels such as her fan club, websites, and live appearances. The merchandise featured stylized uses of the word “MAYHEM” that Lost claims are confusingly similar to its own registered marks.
Lost alleges that Gaga’s use of MAYHEM constitutes federal trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false designation of origin under the Lanham Act. The company seeks injunctive relief and monetary damages, including profits and potentially up to $100 million in statutory penalties.
The Legal Issue: Trademark Infringement and Likelihood of Confusion
At the heart of the case is whether Gaga’s MAYHEM-branded merchandise is likely to cause consumer confusion with Lost’s registered trademarks. This is a classic Section 2(d) likelihood of confusion issue under the Lanham Act.
Courts and the USPTO look at several factors when evaluating confusion, including:
Lost argues that Gaga’s use of MAYHEM is nearly identical in both sound and stylization to its longstanding mark. Both parties sell apparel. Both sell online. Both target a youth-oriented, fashion-conscious demographic. These overlapping factors will likely play heavily in the court’s analysis.
The Ornamental Use Defense: When Branding Isn’t “Trademark Use”
One potential defense Gaga’s team may raise is that the word “MAYHEM” on her merchandise is ornamental and not functioning as a trademark.
Under TMEP §1202.03(a), merely placing a word or phrase on the front of a shirt or hat doesn’t necessarily make it a trademark use—it may be considered decorative. But there’s a catch. If the trademark appears in a way that identifies the source of the goods—such as on hang tags, inside labels, or packaging—it may still qualify as trademark use.
Lost’s complaint includes images of Gaga’s merchandise and points to actual sales, web listings, and fan promotions. If Gaga’s use of “MAYHEM” was promoted consistently as the name of the merchandise line or album-themed collection, the court could find that she was indeed using it as a trademark—defeating the ornamental use defense.
Rogers v. Grimaldi and the First Amendment
Because Gaga is using the word “MAYHEM” in connection with music, she may also raise a First Amendment defense under the Rogers v. Grimaldi test, which provides artists with broader leeway to use trademarks in expressive works.
The Rogers test allows use of another’s trademark in the title of an expressive work (like a movie or album) unless the use has no artistic relevance or explicitly misleads consumers about the source or sponsorship of the work.
However, Gaga’s use of the MAYHEM trademark is not limited to the title of an album—it extends to commercial merchandise, which courts often view differently. Courts have consistently held that Rogers protections don’t always extend to product lines, merch, or apparel sold for profit, especially when they bear trademarks that are confusingly similar to someone else’s.
This could significantly narrow Gaga’s defenses in this case.
The Role of Trademark Search and Clearance
One of the first and most important lessons from this case is how preventable it may have been. Before adopting MAYHEM for commercial merchandise, Gaga’s team could have conducted a federal trademark search and clearance review. If they had, they likely would have discovered Lost’s multiple registrations and longstanding commercial use.
Performing a clearance search is standard best practice before launching a product, brand, or merch line—especially when it’s tied to a commercial campaign or celebrity-backed project. A thorough search includes reviewing:
Our law firm’s trademark attorneys routinely perform clearance searches to help clients avoid using similar or identical trademarks that are pending or registered with the USPTO.
Monitoring and Enforcing Trademark Rights
Lost’s ability to bring this lawsuit also stems from its consistent trademark strategy. By registering its MAYHEM trademarks and monitoring the marketplace, Lost positioned itself to act quickly once it became aware of potentially infringing use.
Ongoing trademark monitoring helps businesses catch infringing uses early—before they spread or dilute the brand. This includes watching:
When a potential infringement is detected, businesses can take steps like sending cease and desist letters, initiating a TTAB opposition or cancellation, or—when necessary—filing a federal lawsuit, as Lost did here.
Strategic Considerations: When to Enforce
While trademark enforcement is critical, not every potential conflict warrants immediate litigation. Sometimes the better path is a cease and desist letter, a coexistence agreement, or a TTAB opposition.
In this case, Lost likely viewed Gaga’s global platform and high-profile rollout as a serious threat to its MAYHEM brand, which has national recognition and federal trademark protection. Given the potential for confusion, dilution, or loss of control over the brand, Lost escalated the matter to federal court.
This example underscores the value of working with trademark counsel to assess whether and when to take action—and what form that action should take.
Key Takeaways for Brand Owners and Startups
The Lost International v. Lady Gaga lawsuit may be a celebrity case, but its lessons apply to anyone building a brand:
How Can Our Law Firm Help?
Our trademark attorneys focuses exclusively on federal trademark matters. Whether you’re preparing to launch a new brand or need help protecting an existing one, we provide full-service trademark support, including:
We work with startups, ecommerce brands, creative professionals, and national companies to ensure their brands are protected and positioned to grow—without legal setbacks. If you’re thinking about launching a product, collaborating with influencers, or expanding your brand, don’t wait for a lawsuit to find out if your name is available. Contact our trademark attorneys today to schedule a consultation and build your brand the right way from the start.
