Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Samsung has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Changed?
The New York lawsuit this page first covered is over. The plaintiffs in DiGiacinto et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-00196 (S.D.N.Y.), filed a notice of voluntary dismissal in July 2026, according to Bloomberg Law. The court did not decide whether their claims had merit.A new proposed class action now raises the same technology. Tillery v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., No. 3:26-cv-11448, was filed on October 6, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The three plaintiffs are California residents who say they bought Samsung smart TVs between 2014 and 2021. Samsung has not been found liable, and the claims are unproven.
What Does the Lawsuit Allege?
Automatic content recognition (ACR) is software built into many smart TVs that identifies what is on screen, whether it comes from a streaming app, a cable box, a game console or another input. Samsung's version runs under a setting called Viewing Information Services.According to the complaint, Samsung's ACR captures the screen about twice a second, reduces each capture to a digital "fingerprint," and matches it to identify what the viewer is watching. The plaintiffs allege that Samsung collects and aggregates this viewing activity in a way tied to individual households and shares it for advertising, without the clear and separate consent they say the law requires.
The complaint also focuses on Samsung's own disclosures. It quotes the Viewing Information Services notice as saying the service "neither collects any video footage nor any content displayed on the Device," and alleges that statement is false. It further alleges that the TV setup screen steered buyers toward a single "I Agree to all" option.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
Which Laws Does the Complaint Cite?
Published reports on the 88-page complaint list claims under:- The California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), including its wiretapping, eavesdropping and pen-register provisions
- California's Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act
- The privacy right in the California Constitution, plus intrusion upon seclusion and public disclosure of private facts
- The federal Wiretap Act and the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA)
- California's Unfair Competition Law and Consumers Legal Remedies Act
- Negligence and unjust enrichment
The plaintiffs seek statutory damages, restitution, and an injunction that would bar ACR collection on California TVs without affirmative, separate consent. They propose a nationwide class and California subclasses. Whether privacy and wiretap laws written for phone calls and video rentals reach smart-TV ACR is a contested question; other TV makers have won dismissal of similar claims at the pleading stage.
Is There a Samsung Smart TV Settlement?
No. Tillery v. Samsung is a lawsuit at its earliest stage. There is no settlement fund, no claim form, no payout and no deadline, and no class has been certified. A website offering to take claims for this case would not be an official claims process. If the case settles or a class is certified, the court-approved notice will set out who is covered and how to take part.Separately, the Texas Attorney General sued Samsung over ACR in December 2025. That case ended with a court-ordered injunction requiring clearer disclosure and express consent for viewing-data collection in Texas. It did not create a consumer payment fund.
Who Could Be Affected?
The proposed classes cover Samsung smart-TV owners whose viewing data was allegedly collected through ACR, with California subclasses for state-law claims. The complaint estimates that more than 73 million Samsung smart TVs are in use in the United States. Because no class has been certified, the models, dates and states covered could change.Samsung TVs include a Viewing Information Services setting in the privacy or terms-and-policies menu. Turning it off stops ACR collection going forward; it does not affect data already collected.
What Happens Next?
Samsung has not yet filed a response. The next steps in a case like this are usually a motion to dismiss, then discovery and a motion for class certification, each of which can take months. The case could also be narrowed, moved to arbitration under Samsung's terms, or resolved. OpenClassActions.com will update this page when the docket shows a ruling, a settlement or a claims process.For related cases, see the Hisense smart TV ACR lawsuit, the Amazon Fire TV viewing-data lawsuit and OCA's explainer on smart TVs and the VPPA. This page is informational. It is not legal advice.
Sources
- Courthouse News Service — "Samsung faces class action over privacy concerns with smart TVs" (Tillery filing, court, case number, allegations)
- Captain Compliance — analysis of the Tillery complaint (counts pleaded, relief sought, Texas injunction)
- Bloomberg Law — "Samsung Customer Drops Suit Over Data Collection From Smart TVs" (July 2026 voluntary dismissal of the New York case)
- Bloomberg Law — "Samsung Electronics Hit With Suit Over Smart TV Data Snooping" (January 2026 New York filing)
- Court records — Tillery v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., No. 3:26-cv-11448 (N.D. Cal., filed Oct. 6, 2026); DiGiacinto et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-00196 (S.D.N.Y.)
Frequently Asked Questions
Is there a Samsung smart TV settlement yet?
No. Tillery v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. is a proposed class action filed October 6, 2026. There is no settlement, no settlement fund and no claim form. Samsung has not been found liable.
What does the new Samsung smart TV lawsuit allege?
The complaint alleges that Samsung smart TVs use automatic content recognition (ACR) to capture what is on screen about twice a second, turn it into a digital fingerprint and match it to identify what the viewer is watching, and that Samsung collects and shares that viewing data without valid consent. It also alleges that Samsung's privacy notice saying the service collects no video footage or on-screen content is false. These are unproven allegations.
What happened to the earlier Samsung smart TV lawsuit in New York?
DiGiacinto et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-00196 (S.D.N.Y.), filed January 9, 2026, was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs in July 2026, according to Bloomberg Law. The court did not rule on the merits of the claims. The new California case is a separate lawsuit brought by different plaintiffs.
What laws does the California complaint rely on?
According to published reports on the complaint, the claims include the California Invasion of Privacy Act, California's computer data access law, the California constitutional right to privacy, the federal Wiretap Act, the Video Privacy Protection Act, the Unfair Competition Law, the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, common-law privacy claims and unjust enrichment. Whether these laws apply to smart-TV ACR is a contested question the court has not decided.
Is there anything Samsung TV owners can file right now?
No. Because this is a lawsuit and not a settlement, there is no claim form and no deadline. If the case is certified as a class action or settles, a claims process and deadlines would be announced separately.
