Samsung is asking a judge to dismiss Dua Lipa’s lawsuit accusing the electronics giant of using her face on millions of TV boxes without her permission.
The electronics giant has already blamed the problem on a “content partner” who apparently gave the company “explicit assurance” that it had cleared the image. But in a Thursday (Sept. 10) court filing, Samsung’s lawyers say Lipa can’t sue over the photo anyhow.
Related
“Defendants respectfully request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety,” the company’s attorneys wrote in a filing obtained and first reported by Billboard.
Among other arguments, Samsung says Lipa lacks any trademark rights to her likeness — and that potential customers weren’t tricked into thinking she had endorsed Samsung. It argues the image appeared alongside other logos, such as MLB and Fox Sports.
“An interface depicting a music-video channel among several unrelated content icons conveys nothing suggesting plaintiff endorses the televisions,” Samsung’s lawyers wrote. “The images merely depict the televisions’ on-screen interface, illustrating the applications and … an example of content available on the TV.”
The “Levitating” superstar sued in May, claiming that the photo of her face has been plastered on cardboard boxes for Samsung TVs, violating the copyrights to the image, infringing her trademarks, and misapprorating her likeness. Despite multiple cease-and-desist letters, Lipa said the company had refused to take action.
“Samsung’s response has been dismissive and callous, and the Infringing Products remain on the market to this day,” her lawyers wrote. Samsung’s infringing conduct — using Ms. Lipa’s assets for zero consideration — makes a mockery of her hard work.”
Related
At a time when music stars are facing a complex array of deepfake videos and voice cloning, Lipa’s accusations against Samsung are almost confusingly straightforward. She claims a sophisticated company with teams of lawyers had overtly used a huge celebrity to sell televisions, without any sort of licensing deal or even outreach.
“Ms. Lipa’s face was prominently used for a mass marketing campaign for a consumer product without her knowledge, without consideration, and as to which she had no say, control, or input whatsoever,” her lawyers wrote in the lawsuit. “Ms. Lipa did not allow and would not have allowed this use.”
The lawsuit said the scope of the problem was massive — that the image had appeared on “significant portion of the televisions sold by Samsung in the United States” during all of 2025 and 2026. They asked for $15 million in damages for infringement, as well as an unspecified portion of the “immense” profits the company made on all those TVs.
Samsung responded to the case quickly, and unusually candidly. In a statement just days later, the company acknowledged the use of the image, but said it had been “provided by a content partner” and was merely designed to show the kind of programming available on the televisions.
“The image was used only after receiving explicit assurance from the content partner that permission had been secured, including for the retail boxes,” the company wrote at the time. “Given this assurance, we deny any allegations of intentional misuse.”
Thursday’s filing took a different approach to the accusations, arguing they were legally deficient and must be thrown out of court for a variety of reasons. For instance, it said that because Lipa lives in England, she has no likeness rights to enforce.
“The complaint’s right of publicity causes of action fail to state a claim because … English law must apply, and England does not recognize a right of publicity,” the company wrote, using the technical legal term for likeness rights.
Lipa’s attorneys did not immediately return a request for comment. They will file a response brief in the weeks ahead, urging the judge to allow the case to move ahead into discovery and toward an eventual trial.
