Samsung Sues Peruvian Firm Over Alleged Trademark Infringement of Galaxy Buds
- The intellectual property dispute began on March 21, 2025, when Samsung Electronics filed its initial complaint with Indecopi.
- Investigators discovered that the product packaging featured QR codes that redirected users to online pages displaying protected designations including Samsung, Galaxy, and Galaxy Buds 3.
- Prompted by the initial findings, Samsung requested urgent intervention from Indecopi to prevent the commercialization of the imported goods while the trademark infringement case proceeded through administrative channels.
The intellectual property dispute began on March 21, 2025, when Samsung Electronics filed its initial complaint with Indecopi. According to the source, the South Korean multinational learned about the incoming merchandise through a Customs Alert issued by the National Superintendence of Customs and Tax Administration, or Sunat, covering a specific customs declaration identified as DAM No. 118-2025-10-10-101586-00.
Investigators discovered that the product packaging featured QR codes that redirected users to online pages displaying protected designations including Samsung, Galaxy, and Galaxy Buds 3. Samsung argued that these digital links created an unauthorized association with its proprietary trademark portfolio, potentially misleading consumers regarding the origin of the wireless audio devices.
Indecopi Imposes Precautionary Measures and Customs Seizures
Prompted by the initial findings, Samsung requested urgent intervention from Indecopi to prevent the commercialization of the imported goods while the trademark infringement case proceeded through administrative channels. The regulatory authority’s Commission of Distinctive Signs responded by ordering precautionary measures that included freezing the inventory, halting its commercial use, and executing a formal seizure of the contested headphones on March 27, 2025.
Samsung Peru stated to Gestión that Indecopi established in the initial ruling that the importer utilized the protected corporate identities without authorization on merchandise capable of generating market confusion. The multinational emphasized its commitment to protecting both its intellectual property rights and consumers from deceptive practices.
Importer Defense Arguments and Appeals Process
Legal representatives for LAJ Import & Export contested the initial enforcement actions by filing an appeal on April 30, 2025, claiming the regulatory body misevaluated the evidence provided by Samsung. The importing firm argued that Samsung failed to establish exclusive rights over the standalone term Galaxy, pointing out that other registered trademarks incorporate the same word within the Peruvian marketplace.
Furthermore, the importer denied that the physical headphones themselves bore the Samsung or Galaxy names, maintaining that the imported electronics qualified as generic goods and that the precautionary measures should be fully revoked.
Intellectual Property Sala Confirms Administrative Restrictions
The legal battle reached a significant milestone on January 23, 2026, when the Intellectual Property Specialized Chamber of Indecopi issued a ruling declaring the importer’s appeal unfounded. According to the source, this appellate decision formally confirmed the precautionary measures enacted nearly a year prior, ensuring that the inmobilization, cessation of use, and comiso of the wireless headphones remain fully enforced.
The appellate panel concluded that Samsung successfully demonstrated ownership of the contested trademarks and provided sufficient preliminary evidence connecting the packaging QR codes to protected product names like Galaxy Buds 3. The underlying administrative proceeding remains active before Indecopi, where officials will evaluate arguments from both corporate entities to issue a definitive ruling on whether the importation constitutes a permanent trademark violation.