Dua Lipa / Samsung Lawsuit Explained

Dua Lipa is suing Samsung Electronics for at least $15 million over the electronics giant’s use of a photograph of the singer on cardboard packaging for Samsung televisions sold across the United States.

Lipa alleges Samsung used a copyrighted photograph she owns without permission, creating the false impression that she endorsed Samsung televisions and depriving her of control over the commercial use of her image. Samsung denies intentional misuse, says the photograph was supplied by a content partner that assured the company it had permission to use it, and has now asked a federal judge to dismiss the lawsuit.

The dispute began publicly in May 2026, but a major new development arrived in September when Samsung filed a motion attacking Lipa’s trademark, publicity-right and vicarious-liability claims and arguing that the entire complaint should be thrown out.

Why Is Dua Lipa Suing Samsung?

Lipa alleges Samsung placed a copyrighted photograph of her on the front of boxes containing Samsung televisions without obtaining her permission or paying her. Her May 8, 2026, federal complaint says Samsung manufactured, marketed, distributed and sold televisions throughout the United States in packaging prominently displaying her face. [Federal Court Complaint]

The photograph appears inside an image of a Samsung television screen printed on the packaging. Lipa’s face is shown as part of a tile for the XITE Hits music-video channel alongside other television services and programming icons. [Federal Court Complaint]

Lipa contends that putting her image so prominently on retail packaging improperly used the commercial value of her celebrity to help sell Samsung televisions and could cause consumers to believe she had approved, sponsored or endorsed the products. [Reuters]

What Did The Samsung TV Box Look Like?

The television packaging depicts a Samsung Crystal UHD television with Lipa’s face filling a large portion of the TV screen. The image is associated with XITE Hits, while other icons visible on the simulated television interface include programming and services such as ABC News Live, Fox Sports, MLB and The First 48. [Federal Court Complaint]

That placement is central to the disagreement between the two sides. Lipa argues that using her photograph on a box designed to market a consumer product exploited her likeness commercially. Samsung argues that the package merely illustrated content and apps available through the television and did not represent Lipa as a Samsung spokesperson. [Music Business Worldwide]

Dua Lipa Owns The Copyright To The Photograph

The photograph at the center of the lawsuit is titled “Dua Lipa – Backstage at Austin City Limits, 2024.” U.S. Copyright Office records identify photographer Elizabeth Miranda as the author of the photograph and Lipa as the copyright claimant by assignment. [U.S. Copyright Office]

The Copyright Office lists registration number VA 2-479-685. The photograph was created in 2024 and first published in the United States on October 13, 2024. The registration has an effective date of September 15, 2025, and was approved in January 2026. [U.S. Copyright Office]

When Did Dua Lipa Discover Her Photo On Samsung TV Boxes?

Lipa says she learned about Samsung’s use of the photograph around June 2025. Her lawsuit says she immediately demanded that Samsung stop using it. [Federal Court Complaint]

The singer’s attorneys allege Samsung repeatedly declined to remove the packaging from the market and continued selling televisions featuring the photograph. The complaint characterizes Samsung’s response to her demands as dismissive and alleges the continued sales amounted to willful infringement. Those descriptions are allegations by Lipa that Samsung disputes. [ABC News]

Fans Were Calling It The “Dua Lipa TV Box”

Lipa’s lawsuit cites social-media posts as evidence that consumers noticed her photograph and associated it with the television packaging. Her attorneys included examples of people joking or commenting that Lipa’s appearance on the box could influence them to purchase a television. [Pitchfork]

Lipa relies on those reactions to support her argument that her celebrity image had marketing value and that consumers could associate her with Samsung’s product. Samsung later argued that the posts were essentially exaggerated social-media jokes rather than evidence that consumers genuinely believed Lipa endorsed Samsung televisions. [Music Business Worldwide]

What Does Dua Lipa’s Lawsuit Accuse Samsung Of?

Lipa’s 28-page complaint contains eight causes of action involving copyright, trademark and publicity rights. They include direct copyright infringement; vicarious copyright infringement against Samsung’s Korean parent company; false endorsement and trademark infringement under the federal Lanham Act; common-law trademark infringement; contributory trademark infringement; vicarious trademark infringement; violation of California’s statutory right of publicity; and violation of the common-law right of publicity. [Federal Court Complaint]

The vicarious and contributory claims are pleaded in the alternative against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., the South Korean parent of Samsung Electronics America. Lipa alleges the parent company exercised substantial control over the U.S. subsidiary’s relevant operations and decisions. Samsung contests whether the complaint contains sufficient facts to support that assertion. [Federal Court Complaint]

Why Is Dua Lipa Asking For $15 Million?

Lipa is seeking at least $15 million in actual damages, along with profits Samsung allegedly earned through the unauthorized use of her image. Her complaint also requests punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, court costs, applicable interest and a permanent injunction preventing further unauthorized use of the photograph. [Federal Court Complaint]

The $15 million figure is the minimum amount Lipa says she should receive if she prevails; it is not money Samsung has been ordered to pay. No court has yet determined that Samsung infringed Lipa’s rights or that she suffered damages totaling that amount.

Dua Lipa Says She Carefully Controls Her Commercial Endorsements

A significant part of Lipa’s case concerns the commercial value of her image and her ability to decide which products she endorses. Her complaint cites partnerships with brands including Puma, Versace, Yves Saint Laurent, Porsche, Apple, Chanel, Tiffany & Co., Bvlgari and Nespresso. [Federal Court Complaint]

Lipa’s attorneys say those relationships demonstrate that companies pay substantial amounts for carefully negotiated rights to associate products with her identity. The complaint says she would not have agreed to license her image for the Samsung television packaging at issue. [The Guardian]

What Does Samsung Say About Dua Lipa’s Photograph?

Samsung says it did not intentionally use Lipa’s photograph without authorization. After the lawsuit was filed, Samsung said the image had been provided by a third-party content partner for Samsung TV Plus, the company’s free ad-supported streaming service. [Yonhap]

Samsung said the content partner explicitly assured the company that permission had been secured to use the photograph, including on retail television boxes. Samsung therefore denies allegations of intentional misuse and has said it respects Lipa and artists’ intellectual-property rights. [Reuters]

Samsung also said it had sought a constructive resolution with Lipa’s representatives. The company did not publicly identify the content partner in its initial statement. [Digital Music News]

What Is XITE Hits And How Is It Connected To The Case?

Lipa’s photograph appears on the Samsung packaging as part of a tile labeled XITE Hits. XITE operates music-video channels and has been available through Samsung TV Plus. The television-box design therefore appears to be depicting entertainment available on the television rather than simply displaying a standalone portrait of Lipa. [Digital Music News]

Samsung relies heavily on that context in defending itself. Its attorneys argue that a reasonable consumer looking at the package would understand Lipa’s image as an example of music-video content available through a service on the television rather than as evidence that Lipa endorsed the television itself. [Music Business Worldwide]

Samsung Asked A Judge To Dismiss Dua Lipa’s Lawsuit

Samsung filed a motion to dismiss Lipa’s complaint on September 10, 2026. The motion, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, asks Judge Christina A. Snyder to dismiss the entire lawsuit. [Samsung Motion To Dismiss]

The filing represents the most significant development in the case since Lipa sued in May. Samsung’s arguments fall into four broad areas: Lipa’s trademark claims, the claims against Samsung’s Korean parent company, her California right-of-publicity claims and the way her complaint attributes conduct to the different Samsung defendants. [Music Business Worldwide]

Samsung Says Dua Lipa Cannot Trademark Her Own Face

Samsung argues that Lipa cannot claim trademark ownership over every photograph depicting her simply because she is famous. Its motion cites previous cases involving celebrities including Tiger Woods, Babe Ruth and Bob Marley to argue that a celebrity’s likeness does not automatically operate as a trademark identifying the source of a product. [Samsung Motion To Dismiss]

Samsung acknowledges that a specific image can potentially function as a trademark when it is consistently used to identify the source of goods or services, but it argues Lipa’s complaint does not allege that the Austin City Limits photograph itself performs that function. [Music Business Worldwide]

Samsung Says The TV Box Did Not Imply Dua Lipa Endorsed Samsung

Samsung also disputes Lipa’s argument that the packaging created a false endorsement. Its lawyers emphasize that Lipa’s photograph appeared within a simulated television interface identifying XITE Hits alongside several other unrelated services and programming choices. [Samsung Motion To Dismiss]

The company argues that consumers would interpret the display as demonstrating applications and entertainment content available on the television, not as communicating that every person or media brand shown on the simulated screen endorsed Samsung hardware. [Rolling Stone UK]

Samsung Is Challenging Dua Lipa’s California Publicity Claims

Samsung’s motion argues that California’s right-of-publicity laws should not govern Lipa’s claims because she is not domiciled in California. Lipa’s complaint states that she resides outside the United States without specifying a country. Samsung argues that the pleading and her well-known connections to Britain support treating the United Kingdom as her domicile. [Samsung Motion To Dismiss]

Samsung maintains that English law should consequently govern those claims and argues that English law does not recognize a standalone right of publicity equivalent to California’s statutory and common-law protections. Lipa will have the opportunity to contest Samsung’s interpretation before the judge decides the motion. [Music Business Worldwide]

Samsung Also Challenges Claims Against Its Korean Parent Company

Samsung argues that Lipa has not sufficiently shown that Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. controlled the specific activity that allegedly infringed her rights. Lipa’s complaint alleges the Korean parent exercised substantial influence over Samsung Electronics America and the creation, approval, licensing and distribution of the television packaging. [Federal Court Complaint]

Samsung says a normal parent-subsidiary relationship is not enough to establish vicarious liability and argues Lipa needs more specific allegations showing that the Korean corporation controlled the allegedly infringing activity. [Samsung Motion To Dismiss]

Samsung Says The Entire Complaint Is Improperly Pleaded

Samsung’s final broad argument is that Lipa’s lawsuit improperly groups the two corporate defendants together without adequately explaining which company committed each alleged act. The company characterizes the complaint as a form of “shotgun” pleading that incorporates numerous previous allegations into later claims and repeatedly refers to both Samsung entities collectively. [Samsung Motion To Dismiss]

That argument also reaches Lipa’s direct copyright claim. Samsung’s motion does not primarily contend at this stage that copying a protected photograph without authorization could never constitute copyright infringement. Instead, it argues that Lipa’s complaint fails to identify which Samsung entity allegedly reproduced or distributed the photograph. [Music Business Worldwide]

Did Samsung Admit It Used Dua Lipa’s Photo?

Samsung has acknowledged that Lipa’s image appeared on the television packaging but disputes the legal significance and circumstances of that use. The company’s public position is that a content partner supplied the photograph and assured Samsung that the required permission had been obtained. [Yonhap]

The dispute therefore involves more than whether Lipa appeared on Samsung boxes. Major questions include whether Samsung had valid authorization through the content provider, whether the use infringed Lipa’s copyright, whether consumers could reasonably perceive an endorsement, whether California publicity law applies and which Samsung corporate entity bears responsibility.

When Will The Court Hear Samsung’s Motion To Dismiss?

Samsung’s motion to dismiss is scheduled for a hearing on December 14, 2026, before U.S. District Judge Christina A. Snyder. The case is Dua Lipa v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al., case number 2:26-cv-05019, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. [Samsung Motion To Dismiss] [Federal Court Docket]

The judge has not yet ruled that Samsung infringed Lipa’s copyright, violated her publicity rights or falsely suggested her endorsement. Likewise, Samsung’s request for dismissal has not yet been granted. The $15 million lawsuit remains pending while the parties litigate those questions.