False Endorsement Toolkit: Talent Releases, Clearance Logs, and Demand Letters

How to use this toolkit

Everything here is a starting point. Replace each [bracketed placeholder], delete options that do not apply, and have a lawyer in the relevant state read anything you plan to sign or send, because right of publicity law is state law and these forms cannot fit every state. For the doctrine, see False Endorsement Under the Lanham Act: Celebrities, Models, Sound-Alikes, and the Right of Publicity's Federal Cousin. For the order of operations, see Bringing or Defending a False Endorsement Claim: A Practical Guide. For the short version, see False Endorsement Clearance and Claim Checklist: A Practical Checklist.

1. Talent release and likeness license

Purpose. To obtain written consent that runs to the party actually using the identity, and to say plainly whether it covers endorsement. Owner. Producer or marketing lead, with counsel review. Timing. Signed before the session and stored with the assets.

TALENT RELEASE AND LIKENESS LICENSE

This agreement is between [Company legal name] ("Company") and [Talent legal name, professional name] ("Talent"), effective [date].

1. Licensed Attributes. Talent's name, professional name, image, likeness, voice, and biographical facts approved under Section 6, as captured in the session described in Exhibit A (the "Materials"). Synthetic reproductions are excluded unless a signed AI Rider is attached.

2. Grant. Talent grants Company a non-exclusive license to use the Materials as stated in the table below. All other uses are reserved to Talent.

Item	Terms
Products or services	[specific product or line]
Media	[paid social / organic social / web / broadcast / out of home / in-store]
Territory	[states or countries]
Term	[start] to [end]; [number]-day sell-off for printed goods only
Exclusivity	[none / category and duration]
Fee	[$] on signature; [renewal or usage fee]

3. Endorsement. Choose one.

[Option A, appearance only.] Talent appears as a performer. Company will not state or imply that Talent personally uses, recommends, or endorses any product, service, or business, and will not use the Materials in a way a reasonable viewer would take as Talent's personal endorsement.

[Option B, endorsement.] Talent endorses the products named above. Talent confirms that the statements in Exhibit B reflect Talent's honest opinion and experience, and that Talent has used the product [describe]. Talent will tell Company promptly if this stops being true. Company will stop using the statement within [number] days after that notice.

4. Who may use the Materials. The license runs to Company and to [named affiliates, agencies, and retailers] only, acting on Company's behalf for the uses above. Company may not sublicense, sell, or transfer the Materials to anyone else without Talent's prior written consent. No third party is a beneficiary of this agreement unless named in this Section.

5. Excluded categories. Without separate written consent, the Materials may not be used in connection with [adult entertainment, alcohol, tobacco or vaping, gambling, firearms, political candidates or causes, religious organizations, pharmaceutical or health claims], or to suggest employment by or affiliation with any venue.

6. Approvals. Company will send final creative to [Talent or agent] at [email]. Creative is approved if no objection is received within [number] business days. Biographical statements and quotations always require express approval.

7. Alterations. Company may make routine color, cropping, and format changes. Company may not materially alter Talent's face, body, voice, or words, combine the Materials with other footage to change their meaning, or use the Materials to train any machine-learning model.

8. Credit and disclosures. Company is responsible for disclosures required by law, including disclosure of any material connection. Talent will include disclosures Company reasonably specifies in Talent's own posts.

9. Removal. At the end of the term, Company will stop new uses and remove the Materials from channels it controls within [number] days. Historic posts in the ordinary feed [may remain unboosted / must be removed].

10. Copyright. [Company owns the copyright in the recordings and photographs, subject to this license's limits on use of Talent's identity.] Ownership of a recording does not enlarge the rights granted in Sections 2 through 7.

11. Remedies and notices. Use beyond this agreement is unlicensed. Notices go to [addresses]. [Governing law and venue.]

Signed: [Talent] [date]. If Talent is under 18: [parent or guardian name, signature, date]. Signed: [Company, name, title, date].

Drafting notes.

• Section 3 is the point of the form. The clause in Facenda v. N.F.L. Films, Inc., 542 F.3d 1007 (3d Cir. 2008) allowed use of recordings "provided, however, such use does not constitute an endorsement of any product or service." When the NFL reused narration in a program promoting a video game, the clause did not bar the claim if the use amounted to endorsement. Talent should want that carve-out, and an advertiser who needs an endorsement should buy it expressly. Option B also serves 16 C.F.R. Part 255, which requires honest opinions and bona fide use.
• Section 4 answers Electra v. 59 Murray Enterprises, Inc., 987 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2021). Written consent in favor of one party did not let others use the image. An advertiser who plans to use agencies and retailers should name them. A releasor should resist "assigns and anyone acting with permission," because that language runs with the file wherever it travels.
• Section 5 reflects the model cases. Much of the injury claimed in Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023) concerned unwanted association with a strip club. The clause gives talent a clean contract claim, and that claim does not depend on recognizability.
• Section 7 matches Allen v. National Video, Inc., 610 F. Supp. 612 (S.D.N.Y. 1985), where a lookalike's own New York claim succeeded because the advertiser exceeded the limits on media and disclaimers. Consent limits are enforceable under N.Y. Civ. Rights Law § 51.
• Writing and signature. N.Y. Civ. Rights Law § 51 requires written consent. A minor's consent needs a parent or guardian under Cal. Civ. Code § 3344, among other statutes.

2. Clearance log

Purpose. To answer, in five minutes, "who is in this and what are we allowed to do with it?" Owner. One named marketing or production person. Timing. An entry is completed before upload and reviewed quarterly.

Rules for using it.

1. "Runs to us" must be answered from a document, not from memory. A "no" stops the asset.
2. A vendor's email saying "all cleared" is not a rights document. The contractor in Electra v. 59 Murray Enterprises, Inc., 987 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2021) believed that all rights had been conveyed, could not find a license, and the clubs had never asked.
3. A person with any local following gets a note in "identification cues." Recognition is measured among your audience, not nationally. Downing v. Abercrombie & Fitch, 265 F.3d 994 (9th Cir. 2001).
4. Keep spend and reach. These figures decide damages arguments under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a) and allow you to answer a letter with facts.
5. Do not store the log only on a vendor's system. Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023) shows how vendor-run accounts lead to lost control.

3. AI voice and likeness rider

Purpose. To authorize synthetic reproduction of a real person's voice or likeness, and nothing more. Owner. Counsel for the advertiser, with talent's counsel or union representative. Timing. Signed before any recording is uploaded to a tool. Attach to the release in Paper 1.

AI VOICE AND LIKENESS RIDER

1. Definition. "Replica" means any computer-generated or computer-modified audio or visual reproduction that a reasonable person would take as Talent's voice or likeness, whether or not generated from Talent's own recordings.

2. Authorized Replica. Company may create the Replica described in Schedule 1, using the tool and vendor named there, only from the source recordings listed there.

3. Permitted outputs. Company may generate outputs only (a) for the scripts attached or approved in writing by Talent, (b) for the products and media in the Release, and (c) during the term in the Release.

4. No training or reuse. Neither Company nor any vendor may use the source recordings or the Replica to train or improve a general model, create another voice, or supply output for any other customer. Company will obtain the vendor's written agreement to this Section before upload.

5. Approval. Each output needs Talent's written approval before use. Silence is not approval.

6. Statements. The Replica may not say anything Talent has not approved, and may not state that Talent has used or recommends anything except as stated in the Release.

7. Compensation. Company will pay [$ per output / per month / per campaign], separately from the Release fee. Any performer union terms that apply control if more favorable to Talent.

8. Disclosure. Company will make all disclosures required by law for synthetic performers or synthetic media, in the form set out in Schedule 2. [Optional: Company will identify the Replica as AI-generated in the following way.]

9. Security and records. Company will restrict access to the Replica, keep logs of each generation including date, operator, script, and output file, and give Talent those logs on request.

10. End of term. Within [number] days after the term, Company will delete, and cause the vendor to delete, the Replica and source files, and will certify that deletion in writing. Deleted means removed from active systems and excluded from any future training.

11. Death or incapacity. [This Rider ends on Talent's death or incapacity unless Talent's estate or representative signs a new consent. / Option for estate-approved continuation.]

12. Representation. Talent has [been represented by counsel or union representative named ___ / had the opportunity to obtain representation] in connection with this Rider.

Schedule 1: tool, vendor, voice or model ID, source files. Schedule 2: disclosure text.

Drafting notes.

• Section 1 covers clones not trained on the person's own files. A sound-alike can be actionable without any copying. Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 978 F.2d 1093 (9th Cir. 1992); Midler v. Ford Motor Co., 849 F.2d 460 (9th Cir. 1988). The definition keeps the contract aligned with that.
• Section 4 answers the facts of Lehrman v. Lovo, Inc., No. 24-CV-3770 (JPO) (S.D.N.Y. July 10, 2025), where recordings allegedly obtained for research purposes became commercial clones. That opinion sustained contract, New York Civil Rights Law, and General Business Law claims while dismissing the Lanham Act claims, so a clear contract may be talent's most reliable protection.
• Section 6 addresses FTC exposure. A generated statement of use by a real person who never used the product runs into 16 C.F.R. § 465.2.
• Section 8 addresses New York's disclosure statute, N.Y. S.8420-A (2025), and any parallel law. It applies on actual knowledge of a synthetic performer in an ad, and it defines a synthetic performer as one not recognizable as any identifiable real performer, so a replica of Talent may fall outside it. Keep Section 8 as a contract promise either way. Check the current text and any rule for the state where you buy media.
• Section 12 reflects California's approach. AB 2602, codified in the Labor Code, restricts digital replica provisions in performance contracts where the performer lacked representation and the use is not reasonably specific. Check current text when California is involved. Tennessee addresses voice and tools in Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-25-1105. See Name, Image, Likeness, and Digital Replicas: The ELVIS Act, the NO FAKES Act, and Deepfake Law.
• Federal change. The NO FAKES Act of 2026 (S. 4591, H.R. 8915) would alter this terrain if enacted. Review this rider against any final text, especially any rule limiting license duration or requiring particular terms.

4. Vendor warranty and indemnity clause

Purpose. To shift responsibility for image, voice, and AI rights onto the party who selects the material, and to create a record. Owner. Counsel for the advertiser. Timing. In the master services agreement and in each statement of work.

Identity Rights. Vendor represents and warrants that, for each person whose name, image, likeness, voice, or other identifying characteristic appears in any deliverable or post ("Identity Materials"): (a) Vendor holds a signed written consent or license that expressly permits Company's use in the media, territory, category, and term of the applicable statement of work; (b) Vendor will deliver a copy of that document before first use; (c) no Identity Materials imitate or were created to evoke an identifiable person without that person's signed consent; and (d) no Identity Materials are generated or modified by artificial intelligence unless Company approved the tool, source files, and consent in writing in advance.

Prohibited Sources. Vendor will not obtain Identity Materials from search engines, social media, or third-party websites, and will not upload a real person's image or voice to any generative tool, without the consent described above.

Records. Vendor will keep the rights documents and generation logs for [number] years and produce them within [number] business days of a request.

Indemnity. Vendor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Company and its officers from all claims, damages, profits awards, fees, and costs arising from breach of this Section, including claims under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) and any right of publicity or privacy law. This obligation is not limited by [the general cap / any limit other than $___]. Vendor will maintain media liability insurance with limits of [$] that does not exclude claims arising from advertising or from use of image or likeness.

Drafting notes.

• The document delivery requirement is the operative part. The clubs in Electra v. 59 Murray Enterprises, Inc., 987 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2021) never asked for written confirmation of rights.
• Bad faith and reliance. Failure to investigate did not establish bad faith on the Lanham Act count in Electra v. 59 Murray Enterprises, Inc., 987 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2021) and Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023), but those were cases of weak marks and did not eliminate state exposure. Keep this clause regardless of whether you could win on intent.
• Recourse. The club in Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023) brought its vendor in as a third-party defendant. A clear indemnity avoids arguing about the basis.
• Vendor's insurance. Ask to see the exclusions. The entertainment and "exhibitions and related marketing" language enforced in Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Co. v. A.H.D. Houston, Inc., 84 F.4th 274 (5th Cir. 2023) and Nobriga v. Clear Blue Specialty Insurance Co., No. 3:24-cv-01980 (D. Conn. July 10, 2026) can empty the coverage you thought you were requiring.

5. Claim triage matrix

Purpose. To sort a claim in one meeting. Owner. Counsel for either side. Timing. First week.

Score each row honestly. Answers in the right column do not necessarily mean no claim, but they do mean different work.

How to read it. Three or more strong entries in the right column on the first four rows usually means the federal claim is the wrong centerpiece. A claimant should turn to state law, contract, and the photographer's copyright. A defendant should still take the state claim seriously, since Electra sent six plaintiffs back on New York claims after dismissing their federal ones.

6. Demand letter

Purpose. To stop the use, preserve evidence, and open a negotiation. It should read well as an exhibit. Owner. Claimant's counsel. Timing. After captures are saved and limitations are calendared.

[Firm letterhead]

[Date]

By email and overnight courier

[Name, title] [Business legal name] [Address]

Re: Unauthorized use of [Client]'s identity in [Business]'s advertising; preservation demand

Dear [Name]:

We represent [Client], a [profession] whose work includes [two or three concrete credentials tied to this audience]. We write about [Business]'s use of [Client]'s [photograph / voice / likeness] without permission.

The uses. We have identified the following uses, with copies attached as Exhibit A: [date, platform, URL, description for each use]. [Client] did not authorize any of them, has no relationship with [Business], and has not licensed these materials to [Business].

Why this matters to [Client]. [Client] earns income by [licensing, endorsements] and controls which businesses are associated with [him/her/them]. [Client] [has declined endorsements in this category / charges $___ for comparable uses]. Since the use appeared, [describe specific reaction, for example, on [date] [description of person] contacted [Client] to ask whether [Client] was working with [Business]]. Copies are attached as Exhibit B.

Legal basis. The use appears to be likely to cause confusion about [Client]'s sponsorship or approval of [Business] in violation of Section 43(a)(1)(A) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A), and it violates [state statute or common law, for example, N.Y. Civ. Rights Law §§ 50 and 51], which [requires written consent for advertising uses]. Available remedies may include injunctive relief, damages, your profits, costs, and in appropriate cases attorneys' fees. [If synthetic: The material also appears to have been generated by imitating [Client]'s voice, and the facts of that process will be a focus of any lawsuit.]

What we ask. By [date, typically 7 to 14 days], please:

1. Remove the uses listed in Exhibit A, and any other uses of [Client]'s identity, from every channel you or your vendors control.
2. Tell us how the material was obtained and who chose it, and identify any license or release you rely on.
3. State the dates, spend, reach, and targeting of each paid use.
4. Propose compensation for past use. [Optional: Based on [Client]'s rates for comparable uses, we would expect to discuss a figure of $___.]

Preservation. You should now preserve all documents and data relating to these uses, including posts, ad account data, messages with vendors, source files, AI tool accounts and logs, and sales records for the promoted period. Please pass this request on to any vendor who handled the material. Please capture the material before removing it.

We would prefer to resolve this directly. If you carry insurance, you should send this letter to your insurer promptly. This letter is not a complete statement of the facts or of [Client]'s rights, all of which are reserved.

Sincerely, [Attorney]

Exhibits: A (uses); B (confusion evidence, if any)

Drafting notes.

• Credentials tied to the audience. Recognition is measured among those the ad targets, White v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 971 F.2d 1395 (9th Cir. 1992), so a line about a campaign in this market beats a line about total followers.
• Do not overclaim. "The use appears to be likely" is deliberate. The letter may be read by a judge, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 will apply to whatever follows. A plaintiff with weak recognition should lead with the state statute.
• Avoid threatening with a federal claim you would not bring. Cairns v. Franklin Mint Co., 292 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. 2002) upheld a $2,308,000 fee award on companion claims, including false advertising and dilution claims the district court found groundless.
• Avoid a DMCA threat unless you own the copyright or represent the owner. 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(3).
• Avoid "you owe me a license fee" as the only injury. Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023) rejected this as a false advertising injury, and the Lanham Act damages picture depends on proof. Explain the harm in reputation or lost business if you can.
• Inviting the insurer speeds up resolution and puts the carrier on notice early.

For more on tone and format, see Drafting a Trademark Cease-and-Desist Letter.

7. Response letter

Purpose. To stop the bleeding, protect the record, and test the claim without admissions. Owner. Defendant's counsel. Timing. Before the stated deadline, after hold, capture, removal, and tender.

[Firm letterhead]

[Date]

Subject to Fed. R. Evid. 408 as to the final section

Dear [Attorney]:

We represent [Business] in connection with your letter of [date].

Removal. Without admitting any liability, [Business] has removed the post[s] listed in your Exhibit A from the accounts it controls, as of [date]. If you are aware of any other use you believe is connected to [Business], please send the URL and we will look into it promptly.

Preservation. [Business] has taken reasonable steps to preserve relevant materials. Please confirm that [Client] is preserving the items below, including social media analytics, licensing and booking records, tax records for [years], all communications referring to [Business], and all prior releases or agreements relating to the [photograph / recording].

Facts as we understand them. [One or two factual sentences that you have verified, such as: The post was prepared by an outside vendor. It was a single unpaid post that ran for [number] days. It did not name or tag [Client].]

Our position. We take the concerns raised in your letter seriously, but we do not agree with several of its premises. Section 43(a)(1)(A) requires a likelihood of confusion about sponsorship or approval. In false endorsement cases, courts treat the strength of the plaintiff's mark as recognition among the consumers the advertisement targets. See Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023); Electra v. 59 Murray Enterprises, Inc., 987 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2021). Your letter does not identify evidence of recognition among [Business]'s customers, actual confusion, or a commercial injury, and we see no indication of revenue connected with the post. [If applicable: expressive use, nominative use, release, or limitations points in one sentence each.]

Information request. To evaluate your client's position, please send: (1) evidence of recognition among [Business]'s customers in [market]; (2) any communication reflecting confusion; (3) any lost opportunity [Client] attributes to the post; (4) licensing agreements or rate information supporting any figure you propose; and (5) any release relating to the image.

Resolution (Rule 408). [Business] prefers to resolve this without litigation. Subject to reviewing that information, it is prepared to discuss [a modest license-based payment / a mutual release] covering all past uses and all related parties, including its vendors, with no admission of liability.

All rights and defenses are reserved.

Sincerely, [Attorney]

Drafting notes.

• Do not describe facts you have not verified. You may be held to them. Finish the interviews first.
• Do not deny that consent was missing if it was. The state claim may be strong even if the Lanham Act claim is weak. Electra is a warning here. Winning on recognition did not end the New York claims.
• Removal without admission. Remove promptly. Continued use after notice can support willfulness. Fifty-Six Hope Road Music, Ltd. v. A.V.E.L.A., Inc., 778 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2015).
• Include all related parties in any release, or the claimant may sue your agency, which may then look to you for indemnity.
• If a formal offer comes later, a Fed. R. Civ. P. 68 offer should say "total" and name all plaintiffs and claims. The $82,500 "on each of the Causes of Action" language in Electra v. 59 Murray Enterprises, Inc., 987 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2021) produced a $660,000 acceptance and years of dispute.
• For expressive works, adapt the position paragraph to Rogers v. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d 994 (2d Cir. 1989), Hara v. Netflix, Inc., No. 23-3768 (9th Cir. July 28, 2025), and Jack Daniel's Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, 599 U.S. 140 (2023). See Trademark Fair Use Toolkit: Nominative Use Guidelines, Comparative Advertising Clearance, and Defense Briefing.

8. Insurance tender

Purpose. To trigger the insurer's duties and protect against a late-notice defense. Owner. Defendant, broker, or coverage counsel. Timing. The day the letter or complaint arrives.

[Date]

Notice of claim and tender of defense Insured: [legal name]. Policy numbers: [each policy, including CGL, umbrella, media, E&O, cyber]. Policy periods: [each].

[Business] gives notice of the attached [letter / complaint] from [claimant], received on [date]. The claimant alleges that [Business] used [claimant]'s [image / voice] in advertising on [dates], and asserts [claims]. [Business] denies liability.

[Business] requests that [Insurer] acknowledge this notice, defend [Business], and state its coverage position in writing, including under the personal and advertising injury coverage of [policy]. [Business] tenders every claim for coverage under all coverages and reserves all rights. Please do not treat this description as limiting the claim. Please identify any information you need, and tell us whether you will appoint defense counsel, and on what terms.

The response deadline is [date]. Please contact [name] promptly.

Drafting notes.

• Tender all policies and periods. Publication dates may straddle more than one. In Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Co. v. A.H.D. Houston, Inc., 84 F.4th 274 (5th Cir. 2023), different policy periods had different exclusion language.
• Read the policy for the exclusion before you characterize the claim. Do not volunteer labels like "entertainment" or "exhibition." Nobriga v. Clear Blue Specialty Insurance Co., No. 3:24-cv-01980 (D. Conn. July 10, 2026) and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Co. v. A.H.D. Houston, Inc., 84 F.4th 274 (5th Cir. 2023) enforced such exclusions. Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Co. v. R.I. Cranston Entertainment Inc., 725 F. Supp. 3d 184 (D.R.I. 2024), went the other way, so state law matters.
• Watch the knowing-violation exclusion. The insurer in Princeton Excess also invoked one, though the court did not need to reach it, and a bad record on intent has coverage consequences as well as damages consequences.
• See Insurance Coverage Toolkit: Placing, Tendering, and Litigating Claims for general forms.

9. Recognizability evidence plan and survey specification

Purpose. To decide what the record will show on the factor that usually decides the case. Owner. Claimant's counsel, with client and expert. Defense counsel can use the same table to critique a plaintiff's record. Timing. Start before the demand letter. Finish before expert disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26.

Part A: Evidence plan

Drafting notes.

• The failure list. Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023) set aside "vague and conclusory (and identical)" declarations and modest evidence of income and prominence. Each declaration should be unique and tied to documents.
• A niche works if it matches. Downing v. Abercrombie & Fitch, 265 F.3d 994 (9th Cir. 2001); Hauf v. Life Extension Foundation, 547 F. Supp. 2d 771 (W.D. Mich. 2008).
• Voices. Lehrman v. Lovo, Inc., No. 24-CV-3770 (JPO) (S.D.N.Y. July 10, 2025) lists secondary meaning factors, including advertising expenditures, consumer studies, sales success, unsolicited media coverage, attempts to plagiarize, and length and exclusivity of use.
• Reputational harm needs a witness or a pattern. Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023) named what was absent: anyone likely to hire the plaintiffs having seen the posts, any temporal correlation, and any empirical analysis. Clemente Properties, Inc. v. Pierluisi-Urrutia, No. 23-1922 (1st Cir. Jan. 16, 2026) confirms that harm to reputation can suffice without lost sales.

Part B: Survey specification (give this to the expert, then listen)

See Consumer Survey Expert Methodology in Trademark Cases: A Practical Guide. On the attack side, see Daubert Challenges to Consumer Survey Experts in Trademark Litigation: A Practical Guide.

10. Federal complaint outline

Purpose. To organize a complaint that survives a motion to dismiss. Owner. Claimant's counsel. Timing. After Papers 5 and 9 are complete. Facts below must be true for your client.

1. Caption and nature of action. One paragraph describing the deceptive use and relief sought.
2. Parties. Legal names and roles, including individuals with facts supporting personal participation, per Edmondson v. Velvet Lifestyles, LLC, 43 F.4th 1153 (11th Cir. 2022): who directed, controlled, ratified, or was the moving force. Do not lump defendants.
3. Jurisdiction and venue. Federal question under the Lanham Act; supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367; personal jurisdiction based on targeting. See Federal Jurisdiction Toolkit: Notices of Removal, Remand Motions, and Jurisdictional Allegations.
4. Facts: plaintiff's identity and commercial interest. Named campaigns, licensing, press, audience. For a voice, plead source-identifying function and secondary meaning, per Lehrman v. Lovo, Inc., No. 24-CV-3770 (JPO) (S.D.N.Y. July 10, 2025).
5. Facts: the defendant's business and audience. Who it markets to, and overlap with the plaintiff's recognition.
6. Facts: the use. Dates, URLs, captions, and images attached as exhibits. Explain how the use conveys approval. Describe caption language carefully. Under Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023), a claim that the model works at the venue is different from a claim of endorsement.
7. Facts: no consent. No license, no release running to the defendant, and any prior refusal, per Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 978 F.2d 1093 (9th Cir. 1992). Address known releases directly, per Electra v. 59 Murray Enterprises, Inc., 987 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2021).
8. Facts: selection and intent. Reference tracks, prompts, briefs, and any warnings or prior notice. Plead on information and belief only with a stated basis.
9. Facts: confusion. Specific instances. Conclusory allegations did not work in Canas v. Brama 1 Inc., No. 1:23-cv-11762 (D. Mass. Aug. 12, 2025) (report and recommendation).
10. Facts: injury. Reputation and sales or licensing losses, per Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 572 U.S. 118 (2014) and Clemente Properties, Inc. v. Pierluisi-Urrutia, No. 23-1922 (1st Cir. Jan. 16, 2026).
11. Count I: false endorsement, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A). Elements as stated in Burck v. Mars, Inc., 571 F. Supp. 2d 446 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) or Facenda v. N.F.L. Films, Inc., 542 F.3d 1007 (3d Cir. 2008), and the factors of the governing circuit, such as Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Electronics Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir. 1961) or Downing v. Abercrombie & Fitch, 265 F.3d 994 (9th Cir. 2001).
12. Count II: false advertising, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B), only if the facts support it. Plead direct competition or actual injury and causation. Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023) and Lehrman v. Lovo, Inc., No. 24-CV-3770 (JPO) (S.D.N.Y. July 10, 2025) rejected attempts to repackage endorsement theories.
13. State counts. Right of publicity or privacy statute, such as N.Y. Civ. Rights Law § 51 or Cal. Civ. Code § 3344; contract or unjust enrichment if applicable. Check preemption with Copyright Preemption Toolkit: Extra Element Charts, Removal Papers, and Motion Outlines.
14. Relief. Injunction under 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 65; profits, damages, and costs under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a); fees if exceptional; corrective statement if warranted. Avoid asking for the same fair market value twice, per Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 978 F.2d 1093 (9th Cir. 1992).
15. Jury demand. Note that profits may be decided by the court, per Fifty-Six Hope Road Music, Ltd. v. A.V.E.L.A., Inc., 778 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2015).
16. Exhibits. Captures, confusion messages, and a limited set of credentials. Keep a clean copy of each for authentication under Fed. R. Evid. 901.

Pre-filing checks.

• Every recognition allegation has a document behind it. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11.
• The earliest publication date has been checked against every state period. Souza v. Exotic Island Enterprises, Inc., 68 F.4th 99 (2d Cir. 2023).
• An expressive-work defense has been considered, and the complaint explains why the use is commercial. Hara v. Netflix, Inc., No. 23-3768 (9th Cir. July 28, 2025); Facenda v. N.F.L. Films, Inc., 542 F.3d 1007 (3d Cir. 2008).
• A plan exists for the state claims if the federal claim fails. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d).

This toolkit offers general forms and explanations, not advice about your matter, and every template should be reviewed by a lawyer against your facts and your state's law before use.

Related Documents

Related Articles

• False Endorsement Under the Lanham Act: Celebrities, Models, Sound-Alikes, and the Right of Publicity's Federal Cousin: why each clause and paragraph is here.
• Name, Image, Likeness, and Digital Replicas: The ELVIS Act, the NO FAKES Act, and Deepfake Law: the statutes behind the AI rider.

Related Guides

• Bringing or Defending a False Endorsement Claim: A Practical Guide: when to use each paper, and in what order.
• Sponsorship, Endorsement, and Influencer Agreements: A Practical Guide: full endorsement deals, where a release is not enough.
• Winning or Opposing a Trademark Preliminary Injunction: A Practical Guide: the emergency track after a demand fails.

Related Checklists

• False Endorsement Clearance and Claim Checklist: A Practical Checklist: the desk version of this workflow.

Related Toolkits

• Right of Publicity Toolkit: Releases, NIL Agreements, and Takedown Demands: additional NIL agreements and takedown demands.
• People-Search Toolkit: Opt-Out Letters, Claim Evaluation Worksheets, and Defense Frameworks: identity disputes with data brokers.
• Trademark Injunction Toolkit: Evidence Declarations, Proposed Orders, and Delay Chronologies: injunction papers and delay chronologies.
• Lookalike Domain Toolkit: Abuse Reports, Registrar Demands, and UDRP and URS Outlines: when impersonation also runs through a fake site.