LBS Case Briefs Module 20 | Law School Case Summaries & Legal Analysis | Exam Study Guide | Latest Update 2026

LBS Case Briefs:
Who started the litigation? Who is the plaintiff or government entity or agency? What do they
b b
Module 20 b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b want?
Vanna White was the one who filed the lawsuit as the plaintiff, alleging that Samsung Electronics had
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b violated her right of publicity under California law. Her primary goal was to put a stop to Samsung's
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b unauthorized use of her likeness and to be compensated for it. b b b b b b b b b b




What legal question must the court decide, and what is the common law rule, constitutional
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b provision or statute that the question will turn on? b b b b b b b b




The legal question was whether Samsung Electronics violated White's right of publicity under
b b b b b b b b b b b b




b California law, which turned on the common law rule of the right of publicity and the First
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b Amendment to the United States Constitution. Samsung argued that they didn’t intent on using her
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b actual name or likeness, no photos, sketch, etc.
b b b b b b b




What is the court’s reasoning? (Might include reliance on precedent, statutory interpretation
b b b b b b b b b b b




and legislative history & societal considerations). If there’s a dissent, what are the main points
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b of disagreement?
b




The court in Vanna White v. Samsung Electronics (1992) ruled that Samsung Electronics had
b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b violated White's right of publicity under California law. The court's reasoning was based on the
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b likelihood of consumer confusion and the false impression that White endorsed Samsung's products
b b b b b b b b b b b b




b created by the use of a robot resembling White's appearance. The court also held that the First
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




Amendment did not protect Samsung's use of White's likeness because it was a commercial use and
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b not expressive speech. The court's decision relied on the common law rule of the right of publicity
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




and referenced the cases Carson v. Here's Johnny Portable Toilets (1983) and Midler v. Ford Motor
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




Co. (1988). The court also considered the societal interest in protecting individuals' rights to control
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b




b the commercial use of their identities.
b b b b b




What is the precedent or holding established by the court’s ruling that will be followed in
b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b