Luxury Marketer

Watches and jewelry

Omega owner Swatch Group’s UK court win against Samsung watch faces could redefine Internet trademark law

December 26, 2023

Swatch Group is one of the world's leading manufacturers of Swiss-made watches, including brands such as Omega, Blancpain, Breguet and Tissot in its portfolio. Image: Swatch Group Swatch Group is one of the world's leading manufacturers of Swiss-made watches, including brands such as Omega, Blancpain, Breguet and Tissot in its portfolio. Image: Swatch Group

 

Swatch Group, maker of Swiss watch brands such as Omega, Breguet and Blancpain, has won a major trademark case against Samsung in the United Kingdom, marking a significant impact on Internet trademark law.

South Korea electronics giant Samsung had appealed a judgment last year by Ms. Justice Falk that it had infringed trademarks belonging to a number of well-known Swiss watch brands of the Swatch Group including Omega, Tissot, Longines and Swatch. Earlier this month, Lord Justice Arnold, Lord Justice Lewison and Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing in the Court of Appeal in London rejected Samsung’s appeal.

“Swatch Group is pleased with the judgment, which looked at a new form of trademark infringement in the digital age, and the liability of online providers such as Samsung’s Galaxy Store,” said Mireille Koenig, Swatch Group co-chief legal officer and member of the extended group management board, in a statement.

“The court reached the right result, protecting the exclusivity and value of our iconic watch brands,” she said.

The new Omega Speedmaster Super Racing model. Image: Swatch Group, Omega The new Omega Speedmaster Super Racing model. Image: Swatch Group, Omega

Watch out
The Appeal Court confirmed the trial judge’s ruling that certain downloadable “watch face” apps available on Samsung’s Galaxy App store, which could be installed onto its smartwatches, infringed the trademarks of brands within the Swatch Group.

The infringements included trademarks of Swatch Group brands Breguet, Blancpain, Jacquet Droz, Glashütte Original, Omega, Longines, Tissot, Hamilton, Mido and Swatch, including the luxury, premium and regular lines.

The broadest impact of the case is likely to come from its treatment of the “e-commerce directive” defenses, Swatch Group said.

Samsung argued that it had a defense to a claim for damages, because the watch face apps had been supplied by third-party developers through its online Galaxy App store.

At trial, the judge rejected Samsung’s defense of “mere hosting” (Art. 14 of the E-Commerce Directive) on the basis of the knowledge test in Article 14(1), saying, “The test is one of whether a diligent economic operator should have identified the illegality by reference to facts or circumstances of which it is (actually) aware. The existence of notice and take-down procedures does not itself provide a defense.”

The Court of Appeal went on to hold that Samsung could not rely on Art. 14 at all, because “Samsung’s acts of use of the disputed signs were active, and gave it knowledge of and control over that content. They were not merely technical, automatic and passive with no knowledge or control. Thus, they were not within Article 14(1).”