Swatch wins $11.6 million trademark award against Samsung

Samsung must pay $11.6 million after a British High Court ruling that closes a major chapter in Swatch Group’s long-running trademark dispute with the South Korean technology company. The award, equivalent to CHF 9.4 million, covers infringements involving ten Swiss watch brands whose names and visual identities appeared on counterfeit digital watch faces.

The case reaches beyond a payment between two multinational companies. It tests how trademark owners can police brand assets distributed through app stores, where software may come from independent developers but reaches consumers through a platform operated by a global technology company.

Swatch, headquartered in Biel, had claimed $170 million in damages. Samsung had been prepared to pay $301, according to the court record. The judgment therefore rejects Samsung’s effort to limit the financial consequences of the disputed apps, while awarding Swatch far less than the sum it sought.

The ruling was reported on August 31, 2026, by Keystone-SDA. It follows earlier decisions that established Samsung’s liability and leaves the Swiss watchmaker with a substantial damages award tied to the use of its protected brands in a digital marketplace.

Ten Swiss brands appeared in the dispute: Breguet, Blancpain, Jaquet Droz, Glashütte Original, Omega, Longines, Tissot, Hamilton, Mido and Swatch. Between October 2015 and February 2019, users could download watch face applications through Samsung’s Galaxy App Store that imitated the brands’ trademarks and designs.

The list spans Swatch Group’s luxury, heritage and mass market businesses. That range matters commercially. A brand such as Breguet carries a different market position from Swatch, yet each depends on distinctive names and visual signatures to identify genuine products. Digital watch faces brought those identifiers onto the screens of connected devices, where consumers could encounter them outside the traditional watch retail environment.

The applications were downloaded approximately 160,000 times across Britain and the European Union. Some were free, while others were paid. The judgment recorded revenue of only about $1,000, a figure that underscored the difference between direct app income and the broader value of controlling trademark use.

For Swatch, the issue concerned the unauthorised appearance of protected brand assets, not simply the money collected by the developers. The court’s award places a financial consequence on that use even though the apps themselves generated limited reported revenue.

The courts had already found Samsung liable before deciding the amount. In 2022, the English High Court ruled that Samsung had infringed Swatch’s trademarks. The UK Court of Appeal upheld that conclusion in late 2023.

A decisive point in the litigation was the role of third-party developers. Samsung argued that the applications had been created by others. The Court of Appeal rejected the idea that third-party development changed the infringement finding. Distribution through the Galaxy App Store remained central to the dispute.

That reasoning gives trademark owners a route to challenge unauthorised digital uses even when a platform does not design every item it hosts. It also increases the importance of app marketplace controls, notice systems and processes for removing material that uses protected names or designs.

The damages phase dealt with the financial consequences of conduct that the courts had already determined was unlawful. Swatch’s statement to AWP said Samsung had sought to reduce the damages owed to zero and had repeatedly downplayed the scale and seriousness of the infringements. The $11.6 million award establishes a far stronger benchmark than Samsung’s reported $301 position, while remaining below Swatch’s original claim of $170 million.

The award puts app marketplaces under sharper scrutiny. Digital storefronts can distribute thousands of products at speed, often with developers, users and rights holders located in different countries. The Swatch case shows that a platform’s exposure can extend beyond the commercial return from an individual application.

The reported 160,000 downloads occurred in Britain and the European Union, while the legal judgment came from England. That combination reflects the cross-border structure of digital commerce. A Swiss company’s trademarks can be copied by a developer elsewhere, listed through a South Korean company’s store and downloaded by consumers across European markets.

The case also highlights the limits of measuring harm through direct sales. The disputed apps produced around $1,000, but a trademark protects more than a single transaction. It protects the link between a name, an appearance and the goods or services that consumers associate with it. Unauthorised digital replicas can complicate that link, particularly when they appear in an official branded marketplace.

For technology companies, the practical consequence is a need for stronger screening and faster responses to rights holder complaints. For Swiss companies, the judgment offers a significant precedent for enforcing familiar names as their products move from physical goods into software and connected devices.

Swatch’s legal campaign is not finished in every jurisdiction. The ten Swatch Group brands have brought separate proceedings against Samsung in New York, and those US cases remain ongoing, according to Keystone-SDA.

The London decision gives the Biel-based group a substantial result in one of its key markets and adds to the findings already secured in the English courts. The American proceedings will follow their own legal path, however, with different procedural rules and questions about damages. The British award cannot be treated as an automatic outcome in New York.

For Switzerland, the dispute carries particular weight because watchmaking brands remain among the country’s most recognisable global commercial assets. Breguet, Blancpain, Omega, Longines, Tissot, Mido, Hamilton and Swatch all depend on consistent control of their names and designs. Jaquet Droz and Glashütte Original add further heritage and luxury positioning to the group’s claim.

The ruling signals that protection must follow those brands onto connected devices and digital storefronts. Samsung’s payment will resolve the British damages phase, but the broader contest will continue through the American litigation and through the daily work of monitoring apps, removing infringing material and preserving the value of Swiss names online.