Editor's note: What's wrong with QLED from Chinese TV manufacturers again?
Last year, we wrote about the scandal surrounding the presence of quantum dots in TCL's QLED TVs, and now Hisense, one of the global players in the TV market, is at the centre of a similar scandal. In the United States, two class action lawsuits have been filed against the company in New York and Illinois over allegedly deceptive advertising of a series of QLED TVs. The claims are that under the guise of QLED (Quantum Dot Light-Emitting Diode), the company sold conventional LED TVs with only microscopic quantum dot impurities in such quantities that they simply did not affect the image quality.
What happened.
The plaintiffs from New York and Illinois, Robert Macioce and Kalp Khamesra, claim that Hisense sold QD5, QD6, QD65, QD7, U7 and U7N series models labelled QLED, although these TVs either did not contain quantum dots at all or contained them in such tiny amounts that they were functionally meaningless. The price, of course, remained "premium" - Masioso, for example, paid $160(it should be noted that this is a frankly low price even for a regular TV - gg editorial note) for a 43-inch model in 2023, hoping for "QLED quality".
The lawsuits state that Hisense allegedly knew about the problem since 2017, but continued to label its TVs as QLED. It's not just about technical specifications, but about the essence of marketing: consumers were given the impression that they were buying something on par with Samsung QLED(for $160, yep - ggeditorial note ), while in fact they were getting (according to the authors of the lawsuit) a different technology.
Legal aspects
The lawsuits are based on consumer protection laws, particularly Illinois law. They include allegations of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranty, and unjust enrichment. There is no official response from Hisense, only a traditionally dry comment from Ken Hong, Hisense Americas' head of public relations: "all the products are of high quality" and the accusations are "unfounded".
However, the word "quality" itself does not say anything about the presence (or absence) of the promised technology. The real trial is yet to come. And scientific analysis may be the decisive factor: quantum dots have chemical markers that allow us to determine their presence and quantity. The only problem is that judges will have to define some measurable limit that will distinguish the density of quantum dots in order to have a legal basis for using the term QLED.
Industry context
Hisense is not the only one to receive accusations of not having quantum dots in its own QLED TVs. TCL has already received similar claims, and in 2016, Samsung faced a class action lawsuit for "manipulating" the term LED. It was about the use of the term LED TVs (remember those days?), which really caused confusion, as the marketing term could be perceived by some consumers as a new screen technology. Whereas the technology was only about backlighting (the entire TV industry was moving from cathode ray tubes to LEDs).
What's next?
The outcome could range between a major financial compromise and a requirement to change the marketing of the entire QLED line. The worst-case scenario for Hisense would involve compensation to customers, legal costs, reputational damage, and a possible loss of confidence in the entire QLED segment.
As we remember, the presence of a quantum dot layer is a very difficult point for examination. The question is open - are we dealing with blackmailing consumers ($160 for a QLED TV) or marketing tricks by a TV manufacturer that reduces the already extremely thin layer of quantum dots to homeopathic doses to make a profit from dumping prices? The truth is probably somewhere in between. But we have a chance to get a court precedent that will allow us to clearly define under what conditions a manufacturer can legally use the term QLED in its TVs. And something tells me that Samsung will be the winner in this case rather than Chinese manufacturers.
For those who want to know more
- Scandal: TCL accused of selling QLED TVs without quantum dots
- Not all quantum dots are equally useful: what to look for when choosing a TV
- Editor's Column: The evolution of smartphones is dead, and we all feel it (but are silent)
- Editor's column: why redesigning corporate logos costs like launching a rocket
- Editor's note: what's wrong with artificial intelligence in smartphones and laptops