The LDS Church vs. Mormon Stories: A Trademark Lawsuit and a Missed Gospel Opportunity?

Apr 25, 2026

In April 2026, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) filed a federal trademark and copyright lawsuit against John Dehlin and his nonprofit Open Stories Foundation, the producers of the long-running podcast Mormon Stories. The suit has sparked intense online debate, with some praising the LDS church for protecting its brand and others decrying it as an aggressive move against a prominent voice of criticism and doubt. While the legal merits may be straightforward under modern intellectual property law, the episode raises deeper questions about how the LDS church stewards its public image in an age of podcasts, ex-member testimonies, and faith crises. Does this approach advance the Gospel—or does it depart from the scriptural and historical patterns set by the Savior, Alma, and Joseph Smith?

The Details Leading Up to the Lawsuit

Mormon Stories has operated under that name for over 20 years, hosting candid conversations with current and former Latter-day Saints about doctrine, history, policy, and personal faith journeys. Host John Dehlin was excommunicated in 2015 for his public criticism of certain LDS church teachings and practices. The podcast has grown into a significant platform, often amplifying voices skeptical of official narratives.

The LDS church’s intellectual property arm, Intellectual Reserve Inc., contacted Dehlin’s organization privately in November 2025 about branding concerns. These centered on:

Use of the word “Mormon” in the podcast title and branding.
A 2022 logo update featuring a blue color scheme and “light rays” design elements strikingly similar to the Church’s official symbols (including those used in its rebranded emphasis on the full name of the LDS church and the Christus statue imagery).
Reproduction of copyrighted LDS church photographs and images in podcast promotions and thumbnails.

The LDS church maintains the issue is not the podcast’s critical content or viewpoint. Instead, it alleges willful confusion: listeners might mistakenly believe Mormon Stories is officially affiliated with or endorsed by the LDS church. Negotiations and mediation followed. The LDS church proposed solutions, including a simple, prominent disclaimer clarifying non-affiliation. According to the LDS church’s official statement, Dehlin’s team made some changes—such as altering the logo color to orange and removing certain images—but ultimately refused steps deemed necessary to eliminate ongoing confusion.

Dehlin has countered that his team cooperated extensively: they updated the logo, scrubbed years of thumbnails, added a disclaimer in descriptions, and operated for two decades without prior objection. He described the LDS church’s mediation demands as “unreasonable,” including broader renunciation of rights to the word “Mormon” in future projects.

What Has Unfolded So Far

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Utah around April 17–19, 2026, and publicly announced shortly thereafter. The LDS church seeks a permanent injunction barring Dehlin and Open Stories Foundation from using “confusingly similar” marks, names, designs, or copyrighted materials.

Dehlin responded swiftly with a dedicated podcast episode (Ep. 2139), expressing confidence in his legal position while accusing the LDS church of mischaracterizing mediation. He launched a legal defense fund, framing the suit as potentially costing hundreds of thousands to millions and having a chilling effect on independent voices. Media coverage has been widespread, from supportive pieces in Deseret News (emphasizing brand protection) to more critical takes in outlets like The Salt Lake Tribune and Axios. Social media reaction has been swift and polarized, with many invoking the “Streisand effect”—the lawsuit itself amplifying Mormon Stories’ reach.

As of April 25, 2026, the case remains in its earliest stages. Dehlin’s response is due within 30–60 days, followed by discovery. No rulings have been issued.

The Concerning Approach Taken by LDS Leadership

From a legal standpoint, the LDS church has every right—and perhaps a fiduciary duty—to protect registered trademarks and copyrights. Intellectual property law exists precisely to prevent consumer confusion about source and affiliation. The LDS church notes it handles hundreds of such matters yearly, often resolving them amicably through private outreach.

Yet the optics and timing raise concerns for many faithful members. Mormon Stories is not a fly-by-night operation mimicking the LDS church’s temple recommend process or ordinances; it is transparently critical, hosted by an excommunicated former member whose audience consists largely of people already wrestling with doubt. Suing after two decades of coexistence, especially following the LDS church’s own deliberate shift away from the term “Mormon” (e.g., President Nelson’s 2018 counsel that “Mormon” is a “victory for Satan”), appears selective and reactive rather than consistently principled. Critics argue it risks portraying leadership as more concerned with brand control than with the souls experiencing faith crises—the very people the podcast reaches.

This approach feels institutional and defensive rather than pastoral. In an era when thousands leave or question the faith each year, channeling resources into litigation against a critic—rather than into direct, charitable engagement—can harden hearts and reinforce narratives of suppression.

How This Could (and Should) Play Out According to Gospel Doctrine and Teachings

Latter-day Saint scripture and doctrine point to a higher path: bold, charitable engagement rather than courtroom confrontation.

Consider Alma 30 and the anti-Christ Korihor. Korihor openly led people away with persuasive rhetoric, much like modern podcasts raising questions about history and doctrine. Alma did not sue for “branding infringement” or demand disclaimers. He met Korihor in the public square, asked probing questions, testified of Christ with clarity and love, and invited repentance. Truth prevailed through reasoning, evidence, and the Spirit—not litigation. The chapter models contending against false ideas by teaching openly (Alma 30:44–53). The Book of Mormon never once portrays prophets winning converts through lawsuits; it shows them entering hostile spaces with persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, and meekness (D&C 121:41–46).

Doctrine and Covenants 88:81 commands every member to “warn his neighbor” and teach the Gospel. 1 Peter 3:15 (echoed in modern revelation) urges us to “be ready always to give an answer…with meekness.” The Savior Himself engaged questioners and critics face-to-face—Samaritan woman, Pharisees, the woman at the well—without shielding His message behind legal barriers. An LDS church leader appearing on Mormon Stories (or similar platforms) could address honest concerns directly, testify of Christ, clarify history and doctrine, and then direct listeners to official sources. This would reach the exact audience most in need, turning potential adversaries into a missionary field.

Lessons from Joseph Smith and the 19th-Century LDS Church

Joseph Smith faced relentless legal persecution—hundreds of lawsuits, imprisonment, and mob violence—yet his response was never to suppress critics through courts over names or imagery. He defended the faith publicly: publishing newspapers like the Times and Seasons to counter falsehoods, engaging in debates, and sending missionaries to the very groups mocking “Mormonism.” Early Saints endured the Missouri extermination order and Nauvoo persecutions, but the LDS church’s growth came through preaching, not trademark enforcement.

19th-century splinter groups and critics freely used “Mormon” terminology and even similar imagery. The response? Continued revelation, missionary work, and reliance on the Book of Mormon’s promise that truth will cut through error “as with the sword of [the Spirit]” (see Alma 31:5; Helaman 5:10–14). Joseph taught that the Gospel advances by light and truth, not by silencing opposition (see D&C 93:36–40; 123:1–17 on gathering truth from every source). The early LDS church’s success stemmed from leaders stepping into the “marketplace of ideas” with confidence in the Restoration’s power.

Had Joseph litigated every critic using the word “Mormon,” the LDS church might never have survived its first decade. Instead, the pattern was invitation and testimony.

A Better Path Forward

The lawsuit may succeed legally. It may even reduce short-term brand confusion. But if the goal is the salvation of souls and the gathering of Israel, a greater advancement lies in engagement. An LDS Apostle or Seventy accepting an invitation to sit charitably on Mormon Stories—no Bible-bashing, just honest answers, scripture, and Christlike love—would speak directly to thousands wrestling with faith. It would model Alma’s example, Joseph’s boldness, and the Savior’s pattern. It would turn litigation into missionary opportunity.

The harvest is great. The question is whether we, as a people, will trust the power of truth enough to enter the fields where the questioners already gather.

HumblyMyBrain’s Newsletter

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?