The case alleging a violation of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising over the "game optimizing service (GOS)" on Samsung Electronics Galaxy smartphones will go before the Korea Fair Trade Commission's tribunal in October. It comes a little more than four years after the controversy erupted when the Galaxy S22 was released in 2022.
According to the industry on the 27th, the Korea Fair Trade Commission (FTC) plans to hold a full commission meeting on Oct. 14 to review for the first time the case involving Samsung Electronics' alleged violation of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising related to GOS. The first review, initially scheduled for Sept. 2, was postponed once. The specific reason for the delay was not confirmed.
GOS is software that manages heat and power consumption by controlling the performance of the central processing unit (CPU) and graphics processing unit (GPU) when running high-spec games. Samsung Electronics had installed GOS on products prior to the Galaxy S22, but users could bypass its operation by using separate programs and other methods.
The controversy grew after the Galaxy S22 was released in 2022. Citing heat and safety concerns, Samsung Electronics blocked existing workarounds, prompting some users to protest that performance was being forcibly limited. The issue was that, contrary to Samsung Electronics emphasizing "the best performance ever" when introducing the product, GOS could operate in some high-spec games and limit performance.
As the controversy intensified, Samsung Electronics in March of the same year issued a software update allowing users to choose a performance priority mode. At the time, Samsung Electronics also offered an official apology over the GOS controversy at its regular shareholders meeting.
The GOS episode went beyond a simple debate over game performance and became a turning point that shook consumer trust in the Galaxy flagship's performance and heat management. As it became known that performance was limited to control heat in high-spec games, the debate spread to Galaxy's overall hardware competitiveness, including the power efficiency of mobile application processors (AP), thermal design, and sustained performance under heavy loads.
The core of the Korea Fair Trade Commission (FTC) review is not the propriety of GOS itself, but whether Samsung Electronics adequately informed consumers that performance could be limited in certain environments depending on GOS while emphasizing the product's performance. The FTC case handlers are said to have determined that stressing the product's performance while omitting such information constitutes a deceptive label or advertisement.
The FTC case handlers are said to have regarded domestic sales of about 4 trillion won from the Galaxy S21 and S22, to which GOS was applied, as well as the Galaxy Tab S8, as the relevant sales forming the basis for calculating the penalty surcharge. Based on that, the penalty surcharge is being discussed at around 32 billion to 64 billion won.
Samsung Electronics maintains that GOS is a limited function that operates to manage heat and battery consumption in some high-spec games, not something applied to all applications. As users of games subject to GOS are said to account for less than 5% of all users of the product, the two sides are at odds over whether the related information constitutes "important information" that would determine the purchase decisions of ordinary consumers.
The handling of the case itself is also a point of contention. The FTC launched an investigation after the GOS controversy erupted in 2022, but it has taken a little over four years for the first full commission meeting to be convened. There is criticism that it has taken too long to handle a case that drew strong consumer interest.
Inside the FTC, there was reportedly initial consideration of handling the case in a subcommittee, taking into account that GOS is software that manages heat and battery when running certain high-spec games. It is said the direction later shifted to a full commission review, considering the broader market impact. Both inside and outside the FTC, some view is that the review procedure has been excessively expanded relative to the gravity of the case.
Separately, the civil damages lawsuits filed by GOS users against Samsung Electronics were concluded this year through compulsory mediation. However, because compulsory mediation is not a final judgment by the court on whether there was a violation of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising, it does not legally bind the FTC's determination.
At the upcoming full commission meeting, the FTC case handlers and Samsung Electronics are expected to spar over whether the possibility of performance control by GOS constitutes important information affecting ordinary consumers' purchase choices, and whether Samsung Electronics' performance-related advertisements could have misled consumers.