Samsung Electronics must pay Swatch Group $11.6 million in damages after a London High Court judge ruled that the tech giant unlawfully hosted third-party smartwatch face apps mimicking luxury brands like Omega, Breguet, and Tissot, according to Bloomberg and additional coverage from The Silicon Review.
Court Ruling Details and Trademark Infringement Findings
Judge Marcus Smith delivered the ruling in the High Court, targeting digital watch faces available through Samsung’s Galaxy App Store between October 2015 and February 2019. According to court filings cited by The Silicon Review, 26 third-party applications generated approximately 160,000 downloads across the U.K. and the European Union during that timeframe.
“Use of the Swatch Group brands on Samsung’s supermarket shelves, downloadable for nothing or for little money, is to my mind very damaging,” Judge Marcus Smith said in the ruling, as reported by Bloomberg. “The low price is demeaning of the brands the Swatch Group seek to promulgate.”
Approximately $10 million of the total $11.6 million award specifically addresses “store display infringements,” compensating for the harm caused by Samsung displaying the prestigious brand names on its app store interface regardless of whether end users completed a download, according to The Silicon Review.
Did you know? Swatch Group initially sought $170 million in damages when news of the lawsuit surfaced in June, arguing that the replication severely devalued its luxury holdings, which also include Longines and Blancpain.
Corporate Responses and Legal History
“Samsung repeatedly attempted to downplay the scale and significance of the infringements by trivializing the compensation owed to the Swatch Group’s well-known brands,” a Swatch Group spokesperson told Bloomberg.
Tissot chief executive Sylvain Dolla stated in a prior witness filing that allowing luxury timepieces to appear on smart watches “kill[s] the value of the fine Swiss watch,” according to Bloomberg. Conversely, Samsung maintained during the proceedings that it suffered no actual harm, earned only about $300 from the disputed software, and removed all replicating apps promptly upon learning of the issue, as noted by The Silicon Review.
This London decision follows prior litigation. A London High Court previously found Samsung liable for trademark infringement in 2022 because the tech company maintained control over the app review and distribution process, a liability upheld through a subsequent 2023 appeal referenced by The Silicon Review.
Potential Appeals and Pending U.S. Litigation
Samsung has indicated that the legal battle is not definitively closed. “We are carefully considering the High Court’s judgment and will consider all possible countermeasures, including an appeal,” a Samsung spokesperson told Bloomberg. Representatives for both companies did not immediately respond to Robb Report requests for comment.
Beyond the U.K. proceedings, the dispute extends internationally. A similar lawsuit filed by the same luxury brands remains pending in a U.S. court, though those domestic proceedings have been stayed awaiting the resolution of the London litigation, according to The Silicon Review.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why was Samsung ordered to pay Swatch Group $11.6 million?
A London High Court judge ruled that Samsung infringed trademarks by permitting its app store to host third-party smartwatch apps displaying digital replicas of luxury watch faces from Swatch-owned brands like Omega, Tissot, and Breguet.
Who created the infringing watch face apps?
The applications were developed by third-party creators rather than Samsung, but the court held Samsung liable because the tech company managed and controlled the Galaxy App Store review and distribution process.
What is the status of the legal dispute outside the U.K.?
A parallel lawsuit filed by the luxury brands against Samsung is currently pending in a United States court, though it was stayed pending the outcome of the London case.
Call to Action: What are your thoughts on app store operator liability for third-party content? Share your perspective in the comments below, explore our latest luxury industry coverage, or subscribe to our newsletter for updates on intellectual property law.
Related reading