The Lexi Love Trademark Battle: Inside the $1 Million Intellectual Property Showdown

In the digital age, a stage name is more than an identity—it is a valuable commercial asset. The Lexi Love lawsuit, which intensified throughout 2025 and early 2026, serves as a cautionary tale for performers and digital entrepreneurs alike. The legal dispute pits RuPaul’s Drag Race star Lexi Love (legal name Clair Barnes) against Selena Scola, a former adult entertainer and “AI Architect” who claims exclusive federal rights to the Lexi Love® trademark. With hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost bookings and deleted social media accounts at stake, the case is a landmark test of trademark abandonment and “prior use” in the social media era.

The Conflict: Federal Registration vs. Common Law Use

The dispute began in earnest in early 2025, shortly after the cast reveal for Season 17 of RuPaul’s Drag Race. Selena Scola, who first used the name in the adult industry in 2004, issued a wave of cease-and-desist notices to Paramount, MTV, World of Wonder, and various live performance venues. Scola alleged that Barnes’s use of the name constituted willful trademark infringement and damaged her “AI-driven talent” brand.

However, an investigation into the Lexi Love lawsuit filings reveals a complex history of the mark. Scola’s original federal trademark registration lapsed in 2015. She did not re-file for the mark until February 2024—curiously, just as Barnes was gaining national attention—and the new registration was not granted until January 2025. Barnes’s legal team argues that Scola “abandoned” the mark for nearly a decade, allowing Barnes to establish common law rights through continuous use since 2009. This technical battle over “lapsed” rights is a recurring theme in major corporate litigation, such as the Walmart class action lawsuit 2025 developments.

Retaliation and the “Deadnaming” Controversy

The Lexi Love lawsuit turned deeply personal in August 2025. Barnes reported that Scola’s aggressive reporting led to the suspension of her Cameo, X (formerly Twitter), and Spotify accounts. Most notably, Meta’s copyright policies forced Barnes to “deadname” herself on Instagram—using her legal name instead of her stage name—to avoid total deactivation. Barnes alleges that Scola’s actions moved beyond brand protection and into harassment, specifically citing Scola’s public comments that allegedly weaponized Barnes’s HIV status and trans identity as “harmful associations” for the AI brand.

This level of personal and professional interference has led Barnes to file a counter-suit for tortious interference and declaratory relief. Her team seeks to invalidate Scola’s 2025 trademark on the grounds of bad faith and non-continuous use. The high emotional and financial stakes in this case mirror the intensity seen in the Tyler Perry lawsuit Derek Dixon, where personal history and professional reputation collide in a court of law.

The May 2026 Court Date and Corporate Involvement

As of March 2026, the Lexi Love lawsuit has entered a new phase. In a strategic move, Scola expanded her claim to include Paramount and World of Wonder as defendants. Legal analysts suggest this may backfire; by “poking the bear,” Scola is now facing the combined legal departments of multi-billion dollar corporations. These entities have the resources to litigate the “abandonment” defense to its fullest extent, a strategy often employed in large-scale privacy or trademark battles like the Google class action lawsuit 2025.

Current Status for the Performer

Despite the legal pressure, the “drag” Lexi Love has remained resilient. After raising significant funds via GoFundMe for her “Name Defense Fund,” she has officially “lawyered up” and is moving toward a jury trial. For now, she continues to perform under the mononym “Lexi” or her legal name to mitigate further takedowns, while her legal team fights for the reinstatement of her full professional brand.

Key Legal Issues to be Decided:

• Trademark Abandonment: Did Scola’s nine-year gap (2015–2024) constitute a legal forfeiture of the name?
• Likelihood of Confusion: Is a reasonable consumer likely to confuse a live drag performer with an AI-generated digital persona?
• Seniority: Does Barnes’s continuous use since 2009 override a newly reinstated 2025 federal registration?
• Damages: Can Scola be held liable for the “hundreds of thousands” in lost revenue Barnes incurred during the takedowns?

Conclusion

The Lexi Love lawsuit is a landmark case for the “creator economy.” It highlights the vital importance of federal trademark registration for performers *before* they achieve national fame. As the 2026 trial approaches, the outcome will likely define how the law protects human performers against “AI Architects” and digital entities claiming legacy names. For Lexi Love, the fight is not just about a name, but about the right to exist and thrive in an industry increasingly dominated by digital gatekeepers.