Taylor Swift got slapped on the wrist by the judge in her "Shake It Off" lawsuit, who said the singer should never have gone after attorneys' fees because she's rich enough to pay her own legal bills.
As The Blast first reported, after she was victorious in court over the lyrics of her hit song, Swift argued that the guys that sued her should have to cover her legal expenses.
Not only did the judge deny her request, he let it be known just how wrong he felt she was for even asking.
“Although the Court disagreed with Plaintiffs, their litigation position was neither frivolous nor objectively unreasonable," judge Michael Fitzgerald wrote in a ruling issued Monday. "And the purposes of the Copyright Act – namely, encouraging and rewarding creative endeavors – would not be well-served by a fee award."
But then Fitzgerald went in on Swift, saying he would have rather ruled on behalf of the plaintiffs in the whole case rather than award her attorneys' fees.
“Put more bluntly, if the Court’s only choice were between awarding fees to Defendants based on the Complaint or fees to Plaintiffs based on the Motion, the Court would without hesitation award the fees to Plaintiffs.”
Fitzgerald then notes that Swift's $75,000 legal bill is more than reasonable for someone of her financial status. He said, "The Court is comfortable in concluding that the singer and songwriters of Shake it Off (which is on an album, of which more than 10 million units have been sold worldwide) are perfectly capable of bearing the approximately $75,000 in attorneys’ fees that they request through the present Motion.”
He concluded with a warning to Taylor Swift, saying, “There are very few recording artists, if any, who have a greater interest than Ms. Swift in a robust regime of copyright law. Be careful what you wish for."