It seems like everywhere you look, especially at a place like Baruch, everyone is paying attention to his or her smartphone. It has become such a huge part of our lives that taking away these devices would probably cause a huge disturbance in our daily routines. Most probably, the phones that see on campus are likely to be Apple or Samsung products.

Apple and Samsung control nearly half of the market when it comes to smartphones. According to recent data, these two companies are the major players in the $279.9 billion global smartphone field. However, an ongoing dispute between the two companies could have long-term implications on the smartphone market.

The White House decided against overruling a ban on certain Samsung products imposed by the International Trade Commission in August after the panel ruled that some older Samsung devices infringed on Apple’s patents. There won’t be any immediate effects and Samsung will likely seek to delay the ban by appealing in U.S. courts. Even if the South Korean manufacturer is forced to stop selling their phones in the United States, only older, unpopular models would be affected.

The issue isn’t just about which phones Samsung can sell in the U.S. In my opinion, the White House isn’t giving Samsung the same advantage as Apple by letting the ban stand, even  after a similar ban on Apple products was overruled earlier in the year.  A Samsung spokesperson commented that the ban “will serve only to reduce competition and limit choice for the American consumer.” From South Korea’s end, it appears that the U.S. is playing favorites and giving an unfair advantage to American businesses. Such a precedent might give other American companies the impression that they will be protected by the government if similar disputes break out with foreign competitors.

If the law weren’t in favor of the California-based smartphone giant, you would have been hearing about a ban on Apple products instead. How would you feel if you were planning to buy a new model of the iPhone only to learn that it was unfairly banned?