Samsung, the most widely used individual mobile-device brand in Africa, has been ordered to pay $11.6 million after third-party apps offered through its Galaxy marketplace copied some of the world’s best-known luxury watches.
Samsung devices generated 32.06% of mobile internet usage measured across Africa in July 2026, according to Statcounter Global Stats.
Apple ranked second with 18.04%, followed by Xiaomi, Oppo and Huawei after devices whose manufacturers could not be identified were excluded.
The data help establish why a judgment concerning Samsung’s control of its digital marketplace extends beyond Europe. Samsung phones and other connected devices are used extensively across Africa, while its Galaxy watches are sold in major markets including Nigeria, Kenya, Egypt and South Africa.
However, Statcounter’s figures measure internet usage, not phone shipments or retail sales.
**What the African numbers actually show**
Statcounter calculates its market estimates from more than three billion monthly page views across over one million websites.
The company identifies the manufacturers of devices accessing those websites and uses the resulting traffic to estimate usage share.
**DON'T MISS THIS: ****Samsung gains ground in Africa's entry-level smartphone market amid growing demand for affordable devices**
That provides a large and current sample of devices actively being used online. It is particularly relevant to this story because the dispute concerns applications distributed through Samsung’s digital ecosystem.
It does not show how many new Samsung phones were sold during the month, and frequent internet users may generate more page views than other customers.
Shipment studies consequently produce different rankings.
BI Africa previously reported that Samsung accounted for 21% of African smartphone shipments during the first quarter of 2025. Transsion controlled 47% when its Tecno, Infinix and Itel brands were combined.
**The $11.6 million judgment**
The Financial Times reported that London’s High Court awarded Swatch Group $11.6 million on 26 August after finding that Samsung’s marketplace hosted digital copies of luxury watch designs.
The dispute involved 26 watch-face applications associated with brands including Omega, Tissot, Longines, Breguet and Blancpain.
Independent developers created the applications. Samsung did not design the copied watch faces.
However, the court had previously found the South Korean company liable for trademark infringement because of its role in reviewing, approving and displaying the applications in its Galaxy store.
Some of the apps used protected brand names and recreated distinctive features of physical Swatch Group watches.
The case began in 2019 and concerned applications available between 2015 and 2019.
**Swatch wanted $170 million**
The final award was substantially lower than the approximately $170 million sought by Swatch Group.
Samsung argued that Swatch had suffered little measurable damage and that an award of approximately $300 would be appropriate.
The court rejected both positions.
Approximately $10 million of the final award related to the display of Swatch’s trademarks in Samsung’s marketplace, regardless of whether individual users downloaded the apps.
Mr Justice Marcus Smith compared the digital marketplace with a physical supermarket displaying unauthorised branded goods.
The judge found that making digital copies available free or at a low price damaged the exclusivity that companies including Omega and Breguet had spent decades building.
Approximately 160,000 downloads in Britain and the European Union were also considered during the damages proceedings.
Samsung removed challenged apps after receiving complaints, but the court found that subsequent removal did not eliminate responsibility for the earlier infringement.
**What it means for African digital platforms**
The ruling has implications beyond Samsung and the luxury-watch industry.
Digital marketplaces routinely host products produced by independent developers and sellers. These include apps, games, digital clothing, virtual goods, themes and artificial-intelligence-generated content.
The judgment demonstrates that a platform may become legally responsible when it actively reviews, presents or promotes infringing products, even when another company created them.
That principle matters to African fintech, ecommerce and application businesses building marketplaces around third-party products.
It also matters to international technology companies serving African users. A platform’s scale can increase the commercial value of its marketplace, but it can also increase the consequences when unauthorised products are distributed through it.
There is no published breakdown showing how many of the disputed watch faces were downloaded in Africa. The judgment also does not suggest that Samsung’s present Galaxy watches or current applications infringe Swatch trademarks.
Samsung said it was reviewing the decision and considering an appeal. Separate proceedings involving the brands remain pending in the United States.