iWorld
WWE Network on track to hit a million subs by end 2014
MUMBAI: World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) on 6 April showcased the first pay-per-view (PPV) on its WWE Network with WrestleMania XXX.
It was on 24 February this year that WWE commenced its first-ever 24/7 streaming network and ever since then it has generated immense traction and buzz among its fans.
The company recently announced in a release that WWE Network has 667,287 subscribers (as of 7 April) and is well on its way to reaching its goal of a million subscribers by the end of 2014 just 42 days after launching in US. It claims to be the fastest-growing digital subscription service.
This announcement comes on the heels of a historic WrestleMania XXX, which aired live on WWE Network as well as on pay-per-view through satellite and cable providers from a sold-out Mercedes-Benz Superdome in New Orleans.
The Network was first rolled out in the US and will soon travel to Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong and the Nordics in late 2014 or early 2015.
WWE Network is the first 24/7 streaming network that provides access to live and scheduled programming, including all 12 live pay-per-view events, as well as the most comprehensive video-on-demand library. Available for a price of $9.99 a month – with a six month commitment – fans can subscribe to WWE Network at WWE.com.
WWE Network is available on connected devices including Apple TV, Roku streaming devices, Sony PlayStation 3, Sony PlayStation 4 and Xbox 360. WWE Network is also available through the WWE App on iOS devices, including Apple iPad and iPhone, Amazon’s Kindle Fire devices and Android devices, as well as on desktops and laptops via WWE.com.
iWorld
Taylor Swift sued by Maren Wade over Showgirl trademark clash
Las Vegas performer claims hit album branding overshadows her long-held identity
MUMBAI: A high-profile trademark dispute is brewing in the entertainment world as Las Vegas performer Maren Wade has filed a lawsuit against global pop star Taylor Swift over the title of her latest album.
Filed on March 30 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the suit accuses Swift and UMG Recordings of trademark infringement, false designation and unfair competition. At the centre of the dispute is Swift’s chart-topping album The Life of a Showgirl, released in October 2025.
Wade argues that the album’s title and branding are confusingly similar to her long-established trademark Confessions of a Showgirl, which she has built since 2014. What began as a column in Las Vegas Weekly has since expanded into a touring stage show, podcast and book, with a federal trademark secured in 2015.
The complaint leans heavily on the concept of reverse confusion. Wade claims Swift’s global popularity has effectively drowned out her brand, leaving audiences to assume she is imitating the singer rather than the other way around. The lawsuit cites instances of fans using Wade’s trademarked phrase in connection with Swift’s album and search results increasingly pointing to Swift-related content.
A key element of the case involves the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which had already raised concerns. According to the filing, the office issued a partial refusal of Swift’s trademark application in late 2025, citing a likelihood of confusion due to shared phrasing and overlapping entertainment categories.
“They did not do so quietly,” the complaint notes, referring to the album’s rollout, which quickly extended into merchandise, labels and retail branding aimed at a similar audience.
Wade is seeking a permanent injunction to stop further use of the title, along with a share of profits, damages and legal costs. The stakes are high given the album’s commercial success, with over four million units sold in its first week in the United States alone.
Taylor Swift, known for her expansive intellectual property portfolio, operates through entities such as TAS Rights Management and Bravado, which manage her trademarks and global merchandising operations.
The outcome could hinge on whether the court sees the similarity as coincidence or confusion. For now, the case sets the stage for a legal showdown that may determine who truly owns the spotlight in the “showgirl” story.
