Samsung has accused TCL of misleading Australian consumers by promoting TVs that allegedly do not use genuine QLED quantum dot technology, claiming that TCL advertising breaches Commonwealth consumer law.
According to Samsung’s complaint, TCL engaged in “false and misleading representations” about its QLED televisions — specifically models in the C655 and C745 ranges — by making a series of claims about the use and benefits of quantum dot technology.
Samsung alleged that TCL’s marketing materials included statements suggesting that its 65-inch C655 and C745 models incorporated genuine quantum dot technology to deliver enhanced colour accuracy, brightness, and picture quality.
Among the claims Samsung is challenging are:
That the 65-inch C655 model uses quantum dot technology to display “over one billion hues of vibrant and precise colours,” covering “up to 95% of the DCI-P3 colour gamut.”
That improvements to the C655’s quantum dot technology have “increased light conversion efficiency by 25%,” delivering a “more detailed and exquisite viewing experience.”
That the C655 ensures “effective light emission for 100,000 hours.”
That the 65-inch C745 model uses quantum dot technology to achieve “stunning picture quality and colour accuracy” for “a more realistic viewing experience.”
And that the C655 model delivers “colour accuracy of ΔE<0.99,” making on-screen colours appear “the same as they are in the real world.”
TCL defended its advertising of QLED TVs, arguing that its products genuinely use quantum dot technology to enhance picture quality and that its marketing is accurate, not misleading, and consistent with consumer understanding.
An independent Industry Jury reviewed the case following a complaint that TCL’s advertising may have misrepresented the use and effectiveness of quantum dot technology in its televisions. Both sides agreed that the advertisements, which appeared on TCL’s website, were aimed at everyday consumers looking to buy smart TVs.
In assessing the complaint, the Industry Jury applied principles from Australian Consumer Law and past court decisions, examining whether an ordinary, reasonable consumer — not necessarily tech-savvy — could be misled. The key question was whether TCL’s QLED representations suggested a false or exaggerated use of quantum dot technology.
The complaint alleged that TCL TVs either did not contain quantum dots or that the technology had little to no impact on picture quality. However, the Jury noted that there is no universally accepted definition of “quantum dot technology” and considered whether TCL had a reasonable basis, through tests or expert evidence, to claim that its TVs used the technology.
The Jury concluded that average consumers would understand “QLED” simply to mean a TV using quantum dot technology that delivers better picture quality than standard LED models, without expecting a specific level or type of quantum dot usage.
A Samsung Australia spokesperson told ChannelNews “Samsung is proudly the world’s leading producer of Quantum Light Emitting Diode (QLED) TVs, which are certified as “Real Quantum Dot Display” by TUV Rheinland and are cadmium-free, delivering vivid and bright solutions.
Samsung submitted a complaint to Ad Standards based on independent test reports that we allege showed select TCL QLED TVs sold in Australia either do not contain the required components to be classified as a QLED, or, even if they do, do not meaningfully contribute to, or impact on, colour conversion or colour gamut coverage in the TV display panel. On this basis, Samsung alleged that TCL advertising these TVs as QLED technology is inaccurate and misleading to consumers.
While we respect the decision from Ad Standards, we are disappointed in the outcome and firmly maintain our position.”.
About the Author
