The case of Lost International v. Lady Gaga, pending before the United States District Court for the Central District of California, centres on allegations of trademark infringement involving the use of the mark “Mayhem.” The plaintiff, a long-established surf and lifestyle brand, asserts that Lady Gaga’s commercial use of the word “Mayhem” in connection with her 2025 album, global tour, and merchandise constitutes a violation of its federally registered and incontestable trademark rights. At issue is not only the potential for consumer confusion but also the broader implications of enforcing brand identity against unauthorised celebrity use.
Brand History
Founded in 1985, Lost International is a California-based surf and lifestyle brand. Since 1986, it has used the mark “Mayhem” in connection with surfboards, apparel and surf-related media. The name originates from co-founder Matt Biolos’ nickname and has become a defining element of the brand’s identity.
Lost owns a U.S. trademark registration for “Mayhem”, issued in 2015 for goods in Class 25, including t-shirts, tank tops, jackets, and other apparel. The mark has also been registered in Japan since 1999. In the United States, the mark has acquired incontestable status under federal law.
Lady Gaga’s Use of Mayhem
On 7 March 2025, Lady Gaga released a music album titled Mayhem and announced a global concert tour under the same name. Around this time, she also began selling merchandise that prominently features the word “Mayhem”.
According to the complaint, Gaga’s merchandise includes a stylised version of the mark that is substantially similar, if not nearly identical, to the design used by Lost. The complaint further alleges that the unauthorised use began before the album release and continued even after Lost sent a cease-and-desist letter.
Lost Claims
Lost International brings forward several causes of action, all arising from what it describes as a deliberate and unauthorised use of its trademarked identity.
- Federal trademark infringement under 15 of the USC (United States Code), Section 1114.
- Common law trademark infringement.
- False designation of origin under 15 U.S.C. Section 1125(a)
- False advertising under15 of the USC, Section 1125(a), and under Section 17500 of the California Business and Professions Code
- Trademark dilution under 15 of the USC, Section 1125(c), and under Section 14247 of the California Business and Professions Code
- Unfair competition under Sections 17200 and 17500 of the California Business and Professions Code
Trademark Infringement and Common Law Trademark Infringement
Lost alleges that Lady Gaga is using a mark identical or substantially similar to its federally registered “Mayhem” trademark on clothing and merchandise without authorisation, causing consumer confusion. This unauthorised use also constitutes infringement under California common law by misleading consumers into believing her products are affiliated with Lost.
False Designation of Origin and False Advertising under Federal and California Law
Lost claims that Gaga’s use of the “Mayhem” mark falsely implies that her merchandise originates from or is endorsed by Lost, deceiving consumers about the source of her goods. Additionally, Lost asserts that Gaga made false and misleading representations in advertising, particularly online, suggesting her merchandise and tour were affiliated with or sponsored by Lost, thereby harming the brand’s reputation and goodwill.
Trademark Dilution
Lost contends that its “Mayhem” mark is famous and that Gaga’s use diminishes its distinctiveness and value through dilution and brand blurring in the marketplace.
Unfair Business Practices and Common Law Unfair Competition
Lost argues that Gaga’s actions constitute unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business practices, giving her an unjust commercial advantage. Additionally, Lost accuses Gaga of deceptive conduct that passes off her goods as associated with Lost, constituting unfair competition under California common law.
The claims are grounded in Lost’s position that Gaga’s use of the mark is unauthorised, creates a false impression of affiliation, and undermines the value of the brand’s identity.
Legal Issues
The legal question centres on the likelihood of confusion. Lost argues that consumers encountering Gaga’s merchandise may reasonably believe it is affiliated with or endorsed by Lost. The complaint also references alleged wilfulness, pointing to continued use of the mark after notice of infringement as evidence of intentional conduct.
Lost claims that this has caused actual confusion, diverted sales, and diminished its ability to control the quality and reputation associated with its mark. The inclusion of false advertising and unfair competition claims further reflects the allegation that the public has been misled about the origin and endorsement of the goods.
Comparison of Logos
A key element of the case is the visual similarity between the marks. The complaint includes side-by-side comparisons of Lady Gaga’s “Mayhem” design and Lost’s stylised mark. Both use a similar font and layout, and when viewed in isolation, the designs appear nearly indistinguishable.
This visual overlap is especially relevant given the nature of the goods at issue. Apparel and merchandise are often purchased based on appearance, and the similarity between the marks is central to Lost’s claim of confusion in the marketplace.
This similarity is particularly relevant given the nature of the goods in question. Apparel and merchandise are often purchased based on visual appearance, and Lost argues that the resemblance is central to consumer confusion in the market.
What Lost Seeks
Lost International is seeking the following relief:
- Preliminary and permanent injunctive relief
- Disgorgement of profits
- An accounting of revenue derived from the use of the mark
- $100 million in damages
- Cancellation of any infringing trademark registrations
- Attorneys’ fees and costs
The requested injunction aims to prohibit Lady Gaga and associated parties from any further use of the “Mayhem” mark in connection with the album, tour, or merchandise.
Why This Case Matters
At its core, this case is about the commercial value of long-standing brand identity. Lost International has used the “Mayhem” mark since 1988 and holds registered rights in both the United States and Japan. The company contends that the mark is not only widely recognised within its niche but is also integral to its reputation, product lines, and market positioning.
The complaint alleges that Lady Gaga’s use of the mark has caused consumer confusion, weakened its distinctiveness, and interfered with Lost’s ability to manage its brand. This dispute goes beyond the use of a single word, it touches on the right to control a brand identity developed over decades, and the need to prevent unauthorised use of a mark that carries both commercial and cultural significance.
Conclusion
This is not merely a dispute over her album, tour, and merchandise. It is a test of trademark ownership, market recognition, and brand exclusivity. Lost International is not only asserting a registered right but defending its position in the market and seeking to clarify who controls the meaning and use of the “Mayhem” name. As the case progresses, it may offer broader insights into how courts balance trademark rights with the vast commercial influence of celebrity branding.
Source: