Dua Lipa’s $15 Million ‘NIL’ Legal Dogfight with Samsung Continues After Samsung Moves to Toss the Case Entirely

Dua Lipa is resisting versus Samsung’s transfer to dismiss her claim, arguing that the business utilized her face to offer countless TVs without consent. The result might have crucial ramifications for the music market’s growing ‘Name, Image, and Likeness ‘(NIL)property classification.

After Samsung’s effort to dismiss Dua Lipa’s $ 15 million suit over making use of her image on the business’s tv product packaging, the pop star and her legal group are resisting. Their most current filing argues that Samsung exploited her similarity without approval or settlement and wrongly recommended she backed its items.

More particularly, Samsung treaded on surface that is ending up being progressively intriguing to IP owners and financiers: Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights. When it comes to Dua Lipa and others, appropriately locking down NIL rights might considerably broaden the appraisal of the vocalist’s IP and associated financial investments.

Because context, slapping Dua Lipa’s mug on a couple of million television boxes now certifies as a huge ‘no-no’.

The vocalist’s lawyers stated that the case is “simple,” arguing that Samsung utilized her image on a business item without her approval. The filing turns down the business’s claim that the product packaging was not likely to trigger customer confusion regarding whether Lipa had actually backed its tvs.

Samsung has actually argued that customers would not error the addition of her similarity for a branding offer however merely something that might be seen on their TVs. The business declared that a third-party material company had actually clearly notified Samsung that it had actually protected consent, consisting of for usage on retail product packaging. The business rejects deliberately misusing the pop star’s image and has actually preserved that the image was meant to show content offered through streaming services.

Dua Lipa submitted her preliminary suit on May 8th in the U.S. District for the Central District of California, declaring copyright violation, hallmark violation, incorrect recommendation, and offenses of her right of promotion. The vocalist declares that Samsung utilized her image on a considerable part of the tvs it offered in the United States throughout 2025 and 2026 in spite of duplicated cease-and-desist needs.

Last month, the business submitted a movement to dismiss, arguing that a celeb’s face does not instantly indicate recommendation or function as a hallmark. Lipa’s brand-new filing asserts that she thoroughly manages the business usage of her name and similarity, certifying them selectively through collaborations with significant high-end brand names. As an outcome, customers acquainted with her previous recommendations might fairly analyze her look on Samsung’s product packaging as a paid recommendation.

The 2 sides likewise disagree over which nation’s laws govern the star’s promotion declaresSamsung argues that due to the fact that Lipa is English, English law ought to use instead of California’s statutory defenses. English law does not acknowledge the kind of standalone promotion right that Lipa’s claim looks for to impose.

Lipa’s lawyers turned down that analysis, arguing that California’s law governs the supposed business exploitation of her image on items marketed and offered in California and that English law would not always leave her without a legitimate claim.