Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Chinese iPhone Display Supplier Hit by US Trade Ruling [Updated]

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,967
39,976


Update: Apple has issued the following statement: "Apple is not a party to this case, and the order has no impact on any Apple products," confirming that current iPhones on the market won't be affected by the ruling. Original article follows.



Apple could potentially end up having to drop a key supplier of iPhone OLED panels, following a preliminary ruling issued by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) that found Chinese display maker BOE violated federal trade secret laws.

iphone-16-display.jpg

The ITC found that BOE and seven of its subsidiaries misappropriated Samsung Display's trade secrets to manufacture panels, violating Section 337 of the Tariff Act. The commission has proposed banning BOE's OLED imports and ordering existing U.S. inventories be removed from sale.

Apple could be looking at significant supply chain disruption if the ruling stands. BOE supplies around 20% of OLED displays for the iPhone 16 lineup and has built annual capacity for 100 million iPhone panels. The company has even established a dedicated facility in Sichuan province specifically for Apple orders after entering the iPhone display market with the iPhone 12.

The ITC will issue a final determination in November, followed by a 60-day presidential review. According to analysts, these sort of preliminary rulings are rarely overturned. Whichever way things go, existing Apple devices already imported to the U.S. wouldn't be impacted by the ITC ruling, however Business Korea notes that the legal risks could lead Apple to reconsider its dependence on BOE.

As for alternative suppliers, Samsung and LG Display would likely absorb BOE's iPhone panel orders if the import ban takes effect.

The trade secret ruling comes amid escalating patent disputes between the two display giants. BOE and Samsung Display now have six active cases against each other, including five patent infringement suits and the trade secret case.

BOE recently filed its second patent lawsuit in two months, targeting Samsung's Galaxy devices, including the Galaxy Z Fold5, Fold6, and the S25 Ultra. BOE has asked the court to ban the import, sale, and distribution of the products in the U.S., as well as full legal cost compensation.

(Via DigiTimes.)

Article Link: Chinese iPhone Display Supplier Hit by US Trade Ruling [Updated]
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2025/07/21/apple-could-lose-key-iphone-display-supplier/
Last edited:
Plutonius said:
That shows a good reason for companies to want to diversify their supply chain.
Click to expand...
In this instance, it looks diversifying the supply chain might hurt Apple because of the actions of BOE. Hopefully there's some other company Apple can use to continue to diversify outside of China, but that will take time because there are not many options for OLED manufacturers.

Edit: It looks like this doesn't affect Apple's screens as the preliminary ruling is written.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: jhfenton and tridley68
MacRumors said:
The ITC will issue a final determination in November, followed by a 60-day presidential review. According to analysts, these sort of preliminary rulings are rarely overturned.
Click to expand...

Then expect this to be rejected by Trump. He’s never cared about precedent nor what’s right. BOE just has to bribe him through contributions to his presidential library (see Paramount), buying his crypto currency, or other favors/grift and Trump will overturn it.

Plan B is to win one of the other legal cases and settle, but the courts are slow so a trade ban can be in place for years before those cases are settled. See the Apple Watch blood oxygen sensing snafu.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjohnstone, arkitect, dchronus and 2 others
im surprised that Macrumors has not reported additionally reported information about this case.

quoting from apple insider:
"
... since no iPhones are assembled in the US, no panel components are imported. Consequently, while BOE is one of the display suppliers for the iPhone 15, iPhone 16, and iPhone 17 ranges, it's reportedly arguable that Apple would not be affected by the ban.

Apple tends to agree. The company made a statement to AppleInsider and others on Wednesday afternoon.

"Apple is not a party to this case, and the order has no impact on any Apple products," the spokesperson said.
"

wasn't Macrumors also contacted by apple ? even if not, the above apple added commentary on this suit would have been good to report to the community.

note: Macrumors has now edited its article to reflect the above info.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dabotsonline, jhfenton, huges84 and 7 others
Brandon42 said:
That seems contradictory/confusing.
Click to expand...
The way it's written absolutely is confusing because it leaves out some key context from a legal perspective.

Apple's official statement is "Apple is not a party to this case, and the order has no impact on any Apple products."

The ruling itself as written is only applicable to BOE importing its panels to the US and selling the panels to within the US. The ruling does not speak to finished products that contain the panels as a component. Because Apple is a distinct entity from BOE and not a party to the lawsuit, and because Apple purchases BOE's panels and assembles iPhones outside of US jurisdiction, they are not subject to the ruling. The court would have to go back and specify it applies to finished products, or Samsung would have to sue Apple and other OEMs to request the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dabotsonline, jhfenton, winxmac and 1 other person
huges84 said:
Then expect this to be rejected by Trump. He’s never cared about precedent nor what’s right. BOE just has to bribe him through contributions to his presidential library (see Paramount), buying his crypto currency, or other favors/grift and Trump will overturn it.

Plan B is to win one of the other legal cases and settle, but the courts are slow so a trade ban can be in place for years before those cases are settled. See the Apple Watch blood oxygen sensing snafu.
Click to expand...
true. When the Great Leader is bribed, he feels a moral obligation - by his standards - to honor the bribe.
 
bradman83 said:
A China-based company has stolen intellectual property/trade secrets? I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!
Click to expand...
Lets ignore the multiple times Apple has lost patent cases. I hope you like your Apple watch with non-functioning blood oxygen sensor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WarmWinterHat
Even with Apple issuing an update saying the ruling does not affect them, as another member made the point, things could all change if the ITC changes some wording to include 'finished product' because that would mean Apple would not be allowed to import any iphone that has the affected display on it which would have a big impact on Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: winxmac
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back