Assuming things are as they appear to be from the Samsung response (as, IMO, seems very likely), one of the things that strikes me here was that the "research" that a security "expert" conducted seems incredibly sloppy.
Did he actually look in the Windows/SL directory? Did he compare the contents to those that StarLogger actually installs (a trial version is available for download)? This seems like pretty basic stuff. Did he ask Microsoft what a Windows/SL directory might be?
This situation reminds me of the HBGary incident. This guy is actually paid to know what he's talking about, and he has no clue what he's talking about. And this isn't cake-making, it's security! Preposterous.
And the potential for damage to Samsung is significant. The story was front page of The Age's web site (major Melbourne publication). Even an updated headline akin to "Samsung denies shipping laptops with secret spyware" is potentially damaging.
The Age article does note:
"Network World said it contacted three public relations officers at Samsung for comment and gave them a week to send back their comments. 'No one from the company replied,' it said."
Did he actually look in the Windows/SL directory? Did he compare the contents to those that StarLogger actually installs (a trial version is available for download)? This seems like pretty basic stuff. Did he ask Microsoft what a Windows/SL directory might be?