Can a Trademark Really Take Away a Drag Performer’s Name? The Lexi Love Case Update Explained
Updated June 2026
Originally Published September 23, 2025
Stage names are more than branding. For drag performers, adult entertainers, musicians, actors, influencers, and other creatives, a name can become the bridge between identity, income, reputation, bookings, fan connection, and survival.
That is why the Lexi Love trademark dispute has resonated so widely. What first appeared to many observers as an online controversy over a performer’s name is now a federal trademark lawsuit involving competing claims to the LEXI LOVE name, allegations about takedown requests and business disruptions, entertainment-industry relationships, production companies, and the role intellectual-property law can play in a performer’s public life.
When I first wrote about this dispute in September 2025, the public conversation centered on cease-and-desist letters, alleged digital takedowns, alleged lost bookings, and the broader question of whether a federal trademark registration could disrupt a performer who had already built a public career under a stage name. Since then, the dispute has moved into federal court. Cody Barnes, professionally known as Lexi Love, filed suit against Selena Scola on December 19, 2025, seeking a declaration that Scola’s current LEXI LOVE registration is invalid and seeking damages based on alleged trademark infringement, unfair competition, and interference with business relationships.
As of June 2026, the court has not decided who ultimately owns superior rights to use “Lexi Love.” But there has been a major procedural development. Scola asked the federal court for a preliminary injunction that would have stopped Barnes, Paramount Skydance Corporation, and World of Wonder Productions, Inc. from continuing to use the LEXI LOVE name while the lawsuit proceeds. On April 17, 2026, Chief Judge Richard Seeborg of the Northern District of California denied that request.
That ruling is important, but it should not be overstated. The court did not rule that Barnes definitively owns the name. It also did not rule that Scola lacks trademark rights. Instead, the court found that the current record was too uncertain to justify the extraordinary remedy of preliminary injunctive relief at this stage of the case.
What Changed Since the Original Blog?
When this dispute first gained attention, much of the conversation happened online. Scola asserted rights in the LEXI LOVE mark. Barnes, a drag performer who appeared on Season 17 of RuPaul’s Drag Race, continued to use the name professionally. The April 17 order states that Barnes’s casting was announced in December 2024, that Season 17 aired between January and April 2025, and that World of Wonder produced the season while Paramount aired it on MTV.
Barnes has alleged that Scola demanded removals and filed takedown requests against Barnes and third parties promoting Barnes’s performances, appearances, and merchandise. The January 16, 2026 order recites those allegations in connection with Barnes’s motion for alternative service. Because the court has not made final factual findings on those practical effects, it is safer to describe takedowns, lost bookings, and platform disruptions as allegations or as contemporaneous media reporting unless you are citing a specific filing, exhibit, or reliable source.
Media reporting has described platform and business consequences, including unavailable pages or removed content on certain platforms and Barnes’s statements about canceled gigs, but causation and liability have not been adjudicated. Out reported that Cameo and Facebook pages were no longer active and that Spotify and Apple Music availability had changed as of its August 2025 reporting; Them similarly reported on account disruptions and Barnes’s statements about using her legal name online to avoid additional removals.
The dispute is now formally in federal court. Barnes filed suit on December 19, 2025. Scola filed counterclaims on March 9, 2026, asserting trademark infringement, conversion, and unfair competition against Barnes, along with trademark claims against Paramount and World of Wonder.
That shift matters because the legal question is no longer just, “Who has a registration?” The court must examine use, timing, continuity, market channels, consumer confusion, and whether either party can prove stronger rights in the relevant entertainment services.
The Short Update: The Court Declined to Stop Barnes from Using the Name For Now
The most important update is that Scola’s request for a preliminary injunction was denied.
A preliminary injunction is an emergency-style remedy. It asks the court to step in before trial and order someone to do or stop doing something while the case is still pending. In trademark cases, that can mean temporarily blocking a person or company from using a name, brand, logo, or persona before the court has made a final decision.
Here, Scola asked the court to stop Barnes, Paramount, and World of Wonder from continuing to use the LEXI LOVE mark. The court declined to do that. Judge Seeborg explained that preliminary injunctive relief is an extraordinary remedy, and the court found the record unclear on the key priority question: who used the name first in the relevant entertainment channels, and with what scope.
That does not mean Barnes has won the case. It means Scola did not make the required showing for emergency relief on the current record. The underlying trademark claims and counterclaims remain to be litigated.
Public appellate docket information also reflects that Scola appealed the preliminary-injunction ruling to the Ninth Circuit. The appeal was opened on May 13, 2026 as case number 26-3051, and the docket listing includes a preliminary-injunction briefing schedule. Because docket activity can change quickly, PACER or the Ninth Circuit docket should be checked before publication.
Why the Trademark Registration History Matters
The LEXI LOVE registration history is more complicated than a simple “who registered first” story.
According to the court’s April 17, 2026 order, Scola first began performing under the name Lexi Love in 2004 in adult films. In December 2007, she applied for a federal trademark registration for LEXI LOVE. In July 2008, she obtained Registration No. 3,475,773 in International Class 41 for entertainment services. That registration was canceled in March 2015 because required Section 8 maintenance filings were not filed.
Scola then applied again in February 2015 and obtained Registration No. 4,843,150 in October 2015. That registration was canceled on May 13, 2022, again for failure to file Section 8 maintenance filings.
Scola filed a new application on February 10, 2024. That application was published for opposition on January 28, 2025, and Registration No. 7,727,806 issued on March 18, 2025. The court described that registration as active at the time of the April 17, 2026 order.
This history matters, but it does not answer the entire case. A federal registration gives important legal presumptions and advantages. But registration does not automatically erase earlier common-law rights, and a canceled registration does not automatically mean all possible trademark rights disappear. Trademark disputes often turn on actual use, continuity of use, priority, the scope of services, and whether consumers are likely to be confused.
Why the Lapsed Registrations Matter, But Are Not the Whole Story
Trademark registrations require maintenance. The USPTO explains that a Section 8 declaration, specimen, and fee must be filed between the fifth and sixth anniversaries of registration, and again between the ninth and tenth anniversaries and in later ten-year periods. Failure to file the required Section 8 declaration results in cancellation of the registration.
That does not automatically mean the former registrant has no trademark rights at all. U.S. trademark rights generally depend on use. A person can sometimes retain common-law rights if the mark continued to function as a mark and continued to be used in commerce. But losing a federal registration can remove important federal-registration benefits and make priority, scope, continuity of use, and proof of rights more contested.
That issue appears central here. The court noted that Scola’s prior registrations lapsed for missed Section 8 filings and that, on the record before the court, her first cited example of continued use after leaving adult film was in 2012. The court also noted issues with Barnes’s proof, including that Barnes appeared to have used other names and had not yet supported early-use allegations with more than an unverified complaint. The court’s bottom line was not that either party won, but that it was not sufficiently clear that Scola was the senior mark holder at the preliminary-injunction stage.
What the Court Said About Priority
The court framed Scola’s trademark infringement claim against Barnes as turning on whether Scola or Barnes is the senior user of the LEXI LOVE mark in the relevant entertainment services. That phrase, “relevant entertainment services,” matters.
Trademark law is not just about whether two people used the same words. Courts look at how the name was used, what services it identified, whether the markets overlap, and whether consumers are likely to be confused. The court explained that trademark infringement generally requires a protectable ownership interest in the mark and likely consumer confusion. It also recognized that even an unregistered mark may be enforceable under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act if the claimant can show prior use in commerce and entitlement to protection.
Here, the court found the record too uncertain for preliminary relief. Scola alleged use beginning in adult films in 2004 and later expansion into other entertainment fields. Barnes alleged years of use as a drag performer and gained broader public recognition through Season 17 of RuPaul’s Drag Race. The court did not finally resolve those competing positions.
That is the key takeaway. This is not a final ruling about ownership. It is an early procedural ruling saying that the current record did not justify stopping Barnes, Paramount, and World of Wonder from using the name while the case proceeds.
Common-Law Rights Still Matter
One of the biggest lessons for performers is that trademark rights can begin before registration.
Federal registration is powerful, but U.S. trademark rights generally depend on use. A performer may have protectable common-law rights in a stage name if the name functions as a mark and is used in commerce in a way that identifies the performer’s services. The USPTO similarly explains that registration is not mandatory, although where and whether someone registers can affect the scope of their rights.
That said, common-law rights are not automatic just because someone used a name. A performer may need evidence showing when the name was used, how it was used, what services it identified, whether the use was public and commercial, and whether the relevant audience associated the name with that performer.
For performers, evidence can include flyers, booking contracts, invoices, screenshots, press mentions, music releases, streaming pages, merchandise sales, venue announcements, social media archives, domain records, platform analytics, and tax or payment records. If a name becomes important to your career, you should treat those records as part of your business infrastructure.
The Platform Problem: Allegations Can Cause Damage Before a Court Rules
This case also shows how trademark disputes can create practical consequences long before a court reaches the merits.
A cease-and-desist letter or takedown request can cause platforms, venues, ticketing companies, music distributors, social media sites, and booking intermediaries to act quickly. Their goal is often risk avoidance, not a detailed trademark analysis. That means a performer can lose income, visibility, accounts, bookings, or digital access before a judge decides who is legally right.
In this dispute, Barnes alleged takedown requests and third-party pressure. Media outlets reported platform disruptions and alleged business consequences. But unless a court makes findings or the facts are independently verified through filings, exhibits, or reliable reporting, those points should be described carefully as allegations or reported effects, not established legal conclusions.
That careful wording matters. It keeps the focus where it belongs: on the legal uncertainty, the economic stakes for performers, and the practical power of trademark enforcement mechanisms before final judgment.
Can Drag Performers and Adult Entertainers Trademark Stage Names?
Yes, stage names can function as trademarks when they identify and distinguish entertainment services. That can be true for drag performers, adult entertainers, musicians, actors, influencers, and other public-facing creatives.
But not every stage name is automatically protectable. The name must function as a source identifier, and the scope of protection depends on use, distinctiveness, market channels, relatedness of services, and likelihood of confusion.
This is why performers should think about trademark issues early. The goal is not to turn art into paperwork. The goal is to protect the name, reputation, and goodwill that the performer is building.
Does Iancu v. Brunetti Mean Adult or Edgy Performer Names Can Be Registered?
Not automatically.
In Iancu v. Brunetti, the Supreme Court held that the Lanham Act’s bar on registering “immoral” or “scandalous” marks violated the First Amendment. That decision matters for artists, adult-industry performers, and creators with provocative branding because the USPTO cannot refuse registration merely because a mark is considered immoral or scandalous.
But Brunetti does not eliminate ordinary trademark requirements. A mark still must function as a trademark, must not create an unlawful likelihood of confusion, and must satisfy the usual requirements for registration and enforcement.
What Performers Can Learn From the Lexi Love Case
First, search before you settle on a stage name. A proper search should include the USPTO database, Google, social media, streaming platforms, adult-industry platforms if relevant, domain names, merchandise sites, and event listings.
Second, document your use from the beginning. Save flyers, booking confirmations, screenshots, invoices, press, venue announcements, streaming pages, music releases, merch listings, and social media handles. If a dispute ever arises, your memory will not be enough.
Third, consider registration early if the name is central to your career. Federal registration is not required, but it can give important advantages, including public notice and legal presumptions of ownership and validity.
Fourth, maintain the registration. Missing maintenance deadlines can lead to cancellation. That does not always destroy every possible trademark right, but it can make the dispute much harder and more expensive.
Fifth, think beyond one platform. If your name is used for live shows, music, adult content, social media, podcasts, Cameo-style videos, merchandise, digital personas, AI content, or brand partnerships, your trademark strategy should account for all of those revenue streams.
Sixth, do not ignore cease-and-desist letters or takedown notices. Even if you believe you have senior rights, a takedown campaign can move faster than a lawsuit. Getting legal guidance early can help preserve evidence, respond strategically, and communicate with platforms or venues before damage spreads.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Lexi Love trademark case over?
No. The April 17, 2026 order denied Scola’s request for a preliminary injunction. It did not decide final ownership, liability, cancellation, or priority. The district court litigation continues, and public docket information reflects that an appeal of the preliminary-injunction ruling was opened in the Ninth Circuit.
Did Barnes legally win the name?
Not yet. Barnes won an important early ruling because the court declined to stop her from using the name while the case proceeds. But the court did not decide that Barnes owns superior rights to LEXI LOVE.
Did the court decide that Scola does not own the mark?
No. The court did not make that final ruling. The court found that Scola had not shown the required likelihood of success on the merits for preliminary injunctive relief based on the current record.
Can a federal trademark registration beat someone’s older stage-name use?
Sometimes, but not always. A federal registration gives important presumptions and procedural advantages, but those presumptions can be challenged. Earlier use, continuity of use, abandonment, scope of services, and likelihood of confusion may all matter.
If a registration is canceled, is the name free for anyone to use?
Not necessarily. Cancellation removes the benefits of that registration, but the former registrant may still claim common-law rights if the mark continued to be used in commerce and remained protectable. The harder question is proof.
Should performers use ™ before registration?
A performer may use ™ to signal a claim of rights in a name or brand before federal registration. The ® symbol should be used only after the USPTO has issued a federal registration for the mark.
What should I do if someone sends me a cease-and-desist letter over my stage name?
Do not panic, but do not ignore it. Save the letter, preserve evidence of your use, avoid emotional public statements that could complicate the dispute, and talk with an attorney before responding. Depending on the facts, the right strategy may involve negotiation, coexistence, a license, a platform response, a cancellation proceeding, or a court action.
Final Thoughts
The Lexi Love dispute is not just about one name. It is about how identity, performance, branding, and law collide when a stage name becomes valuable.
For performers, especially drag artists, adult entertainers, LGBTQ+ creatives, and independent artists, a stage name can be a livelihood. It can be how people find you, book you, tag you, pay you, stream your work, and remember you. When that name is threatened, the consequences are not abstract.
The April 17 order is important because the court refused to treat the current federal registration as the end of the analysis at the preliminary-injunction stage. But the order also shows why performers should protect their names early, document their use carefully, and treat intellectual property as part of the foundation of their careers.
Your name is your brand. Your brand is your reputation. And your reputation is often your livelihood.
If your stage name, artist name, drag name, adult performer name, band name, business name, or online persona is part of your income, do not wait until there is a crisis. Consider clearance, registration, maintenance, contracts, platform strategy, and practical evidence preservation before someone else claims the name.
This post is for general educational purposes and is not legal advice. If you are dealing with a trademark dispute, takedown request, cease-and-desist letter, or performer-name conflict, speak with an attorney about your specific facts.