A Florida artist suing Taylor Swift for copyright infringement has asked the court to allow her to change how she files documents, citing the rising costs of pursuing the case.

In a recent court filing, Kimberly Marasco requested permission to file documents electronically, saying that “significant” mailing and travel expenses have become “burdensome.” Newsweek reached out to a representative for Swift for comment.

Why It Matters Copyright lawsuits targeting major recording artists have become increasingly common, reflecting the heightened scrutiny over creative ownership in the music industry.

Marasco’s lawsuit alleges that Swift and her collaborators used her poetry without authorization in several songs.

The case, filed in the Southern District of Florida, has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon, who rose to national prominence when she was the judge assigned to President Donald Trump’s classified documents case.

What To Know Along with it being a financial burden to continue mailing documents or delivering them in person, Marasco said filing electronically would be more efficient.

It would allow her to submit documents promptly and ensure she complies with deadlines.

Getting electronic access would also give her the ability to be notified when court orders and filings are made, making it easier for her to respond, Marasco wrote in her motion. Cannon denied the request, noting that Marasco does not meet the criteria for electronic filing under court rules.

Marasco originally filed a lawsuit in April 2024, accusing Swift and her production company, Taylor Swift Productions Inc., of infringing upon her copyrighted works.

The complaint alleges that several of Swift’s songs and music videos contain elements copied from Marasco’s poetry collections, Fallen from Grace and Dealing with Chronic Illness: Vestibular Neuritis. Initially filed in small claims court, the case was moved to the federal court system, where Cannon presides. Marasco has faced procedural challenges, including difficulties in serving Swift with the lawsuit.

In December 2024, Cannon dismissed Swift from the case without prejudice because of Marasco’s failure to serve her properly. However, the claims against Taylor Swift Productions remain active.

Marasco filed a new lawsuit in February seeking $25 million, which, was also assigned to Cannon.

The defendants in this case include Swift and collaborators Jack Antonoff and Aaron Dessner, as well as Universal Music Group and Republic Records. Swift has firmly denied all the accusations of copyright infringement and has tried to get the cases dismissed multiple times.

What People Are Saying Marasco told Newsweek: “Printing documents using my HP Inkjet printer incurs approximately $120 for ink and paper, and the frequent need to purchase supplies adds to the financial burden.

Additionally, traveling to the courthouse for in-person submissions is time-intensive, and mailing documents introduces further delays.” Attorneys Aaron S.

Blynn and Katherine Wright Morrone, in a motion to dismiss Marasco’s original lawsuit: “In sum, Plaintiff’s claims remain entirely unfounded, and her ‘final opportunity’ to state a claim fails. At this juncture, dismissal with prejudice is required.”

What Happens Next The court has set a deadline for Marasco to properly serve all defendants.

Cannon has ordered that no defendant shall file a response until all parties have been served, aiming to manage the orderly progress of the case.

As the lawsuit against Taylor Swift Productions progresses, the court will consider motions to dismiss filed by the defense, who argue that Marasco’s claims lack merit and are time-barred.

The outcome of the motions will determine whether the case proceeds to trial or is dismissed.