The High Court has ordered Samsung Electronics Co. to pay $11.6 million to Swatch Group AG for failing to prevent apps that mimicked the Swiss company's luxury brands on its smartwatch displays. According to reports from Bloomberg and Financial Times, the ruling came after the Swiss watchmaker sought approximately $170 million from the Korean technology giant for displaying Swatch brands. Samsung argued at trial that the damages weren't worth more than about $300. Justice Smith awarded $10 million specifically for what he described as Samsung's "store display infringements," finding that simply displaying Swatch-owned brand names alongside cheap or free digital watch faces could damage the value of those brands, regardless of whether users downloaded them. The majority of the $11.6 million award was for the harm to Swatch's interests caused by Samsung displaying the watchmaker's brand names on the Galaxy app store, irrespective of whether consumers actually downloaded the apps.
A previous judgment found that Samsung had infringed Swatch Group's trademarks by allowing designs that replicated the appearance of Swatch Group watches for digital watch displays on its app store between 2015 and 2019. As reported by Bloomberg, the ruling turns what might appear to be a dispute over downloadable graphics into a much broader argument about the value of luxury brands inside digital marketplaces. The apps themselves were developed by third parties rather than Samsung, but the South Korean technology group was found liable partly because it controlled the Galaxy app store's review process while simultaneously promoting its smartwatches through the variety and attractiveness of their downloadable faces. Swatch told the court that the disputed apps had been downloaded around 160,000 times across the UK and European Union, describing them as "knock-offs" of its exclusive watch dials. The digital watch faces mimicked designs from brands including Omega, Longines, Tissot, Breguet and Blancpain, with Justice Smith comparing this to copycat products being placed on shelves in a physical supermarket.
According to Bloomberg, Samsung argued that Swatch's damages claim was "extravagant" and had "no relationship to the damage suffered." The company also said it "did not want" the infringing software on its store and removed it "as soon as the issue was raised." A Samsung spokesperson stated that "We are carefully reviewing the High Court's decision and will consider all available options, including an appeal." A Swatch Group spokesperson noted that "Samsung repeatedly attempted to minimize the scale and significance of the infringement by downplaying the compensation owed for the well-known brands of Swatch Group." The judge's analogy of "copycat products being placed on shelves in a physical supermarket" was particularly damaging to Samsung's defense, as he ruled that "the low price damages the brand that Swatch Group seeks to promote widely," citing the fact that Swatch Group had carefully managed and promoted its brands over decades as a significant part of its business.
As reported by Bloomberg, Swatch has also launched proceedings against Samsung in the United States, although those have been put on hold pending the outcome of the English case. The judgment underscores an increasingly important question for technology platforms: how far does responsibility extend when third-party developers upload content that trades on somebody else's intellectual property. The figure of $11.6 million represents a significant reduction from Swatch's original demand of $170 million, though it still represents substantial damages for the luxury watchmaker. The High Court had already ruled in 2022 that Samsung infringed Swatch trademarks between October 2015 and February 2019, with Samsung subsequently losing an appeal, leaving this year's damages hearing to determine how much compensation was owed.
