Dua Lipa Fights Samsung's Bid to Dismiss $15 Million Lawsuit Over Her Image

Pop star Dua Lipa is fighting Samsung's attempt to dismiss her $15 million federal lawsuit over the use of her photograph on television packaging, arguing in an October 16, 2026, court filing that the electronics giant exploited her likeness without permission and falsely suggested she endorsed its products.

In her response to Samsung's dismissal motion, the singer's attorneys called the case "straightforward," arguing that the company placed her image on a commercial product without obtaining her consent. They rejected Samsung's position that the packaging could not reasonably have led consumers to believe Lipa endorsed its televisions, as well as its attempt to limit her claims under English law.

The dispute centers on a photograph of Lipa taken backstage at the 2024 Austin City Limits music festival. The image appeared within a simulated television screen printed on Samsung's retail boxes, alongside content available through its Samsung TV Plus streaming service. Samsung maintains that the packaging illustrated entertainment programming rather than a celebrity endorsement, while Lipa contends that displaying her face on products sold to American consumers created precisely that impression.

Lipa filed the lawsuit on May 8, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleging copyright infringement, trademark infringement, false endorsement, and violations of her right of publicity. She claims Samsung used her photograph on a significant portion of televisions sold in the United States during 2025 and 2026, despite repeated cease-and-desist demands. The singer seeks at least $15 million in damages.

Samsung acknowledged using the photograph after the lawsuit became public but said a third-party content provider had explicitly assured the company that permission had been secured, including for retail packaging. It denied intentionally misusing Lipa's image and maintained that the photograph was intended to show content available through its streaming service.

In its September 10 motion to dismiss, Samsung argued that a celebrity's face does not automatically function as a trademark and that consumers would recognize the photograph as entertainment content displayed on a television screen. The company also challenged whether Lipa had adequately established that its packaging falsely implied a commercial relationship with the singer.

Lipa's attorneys countered that her endorsement history makes such an association particularly plausible. According to the October 16 filing, she carefully controls the commercial use of her name and likeness, licensing them selectively through lucrative partnerships with major luxury brands. Consumers familiar with those arrangements, her lawyers argued, could reasonably interpret her appearance on Samsung's packaging as another paid endorsement.

The argument goes to the heart of her false endorsement claim, which concerns whether a company's use of someone's identity is likely to mislead consumers about that person's sponsorship or approval of its products. Her separate right of publicity claims concern the commercial use of her likeness without authorization, regardless of whether consumers were actually deceived.

The parties also disagree over which country's laws govern those publicity claims. Samsung contends that because Lipa is domiciled in England, English law should apply rather than California's statutory protections. The company argues that English law does not recognize the type of standalone publicity rights she seeks to enforce.

Her attorneys rejected both the choice of law and Samsung's interpretation of English legal protections. They argued that California law governs the alleged commercial exploitation of Lipa's image on products marketed and sold in the state, and that English law would not necessarily leave her without a remedy.

According to the filing, Samsung's position would effectively allow companies to use the likenesses of English celebrities to market products in California without facing the same publicity claims available to California residents. Lipa's lawyers called that reasoning fundamentally flawed, arguing that the company's interpretation of both legal systems "fails at every step."

The attorneys also challenged Samsung's broader effort to avoid liability for the photograph's use, writing that none of its arguments "excuse Samsung's theft."

The distinction between the two legal systems could affect which of Lipa's claims survive, although the court must separately consider Samsung's challenges to the copyright, trademark and false endorsement allegations. A ruling on the motion to dismiss would determine whether the existing claims can proceed, rather than whether Samsung ultimately violated the law.

U.S. District Judge Christina A. Snyder has not ruled on the dismissal motion. Samsung is scheduled to file its reply on November 13, with a hearing set for December 14, 2026.