Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Aug 2013 20:34 UTC
Legal The Obama administration:

After extensive consultations with the agencies of the Trade Policy Staff Committee and the Trade Policy Review Group, as well as other interested agencies and persons, I have decided to disapprove the USITC's determination to issue an exclusion order and cease and desist order in this investigation.

Lots of talk about SEPs and FRAND in Obama's decree, which means that the Obama administration contradicts everything the ITC has said. To freshen your memory, the ITC ruled that not only was the patent in question not a standard essential patent, but Samsung's offer was actually proper FRAND:

Additionally, the Commission found that there were still disputed issues concerning the patent at issue was even actually essential to the standard (and therefore whether a FRAND or disclosure obligation applied at all).


The Commission analyzed the history of negotiations between Apple and Samsung (this portion is heavily redacted) to see if Apple showed that Samsung failed to negotiate “in good faith,” and found that Apple failed to do so. Notably, the Commission dismissed Apple’s arguments that (1) Samsung’s initial offer was so high as to show bad faith, and (2) Samsung’s attempts to get a cross-license to Apple’s non-SEPs violated its FRAND commitments.

In other words, the Obama administration threw out virtually everything the ITC has said in order to protect Apple. This effectively means that American companies can infringe on non-American companies' (standard essential) patents all they want, because the president will simply step in if they try to fight back.

So, I was wrong. I expected the Obama administration to be impartial and not give such a huge slap in the face of the ITC - as cynical as I usually am, I can still be naive. Protectionism is more important to the POTUS.

Permalink for comment 568903
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Huh.
by Kochise on Mon 5th Aug 2013 06:34 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Huh."
Member since:

Is the sentence "independence of justice" completely unsound ? There are rules, international rules, international patent system every manufacturer agree to comply to. Apple is well known for infringing the patent system, abusing it in every way possible (prior art, copying -xeroxing-, asking ban not on functionality but -rounded- form factor, ...) but when it comes to stop Apple from stepping on other shoes, Woooops, nada, don't ya date touching on Apple's supremacy ? Come on...

Double standards !

Protecting USA's interests ? Who'se gonna be assassinated next by the CIA to protect USA's interests ? What next puppet regime will be put in place to protect USA's interests ? Ooh, and by the way, don't forget to go to church on Sunday, and praise all your soul this merciful God that bless you, because you obviously deserve all His attention. You have so much to be pardoned for...

I'm wondering when you gonna wake up from your wonderful dream were you believe to rule the World. Sure, the trick USA it using -cf this special case- to protect its best interests shows how much USA really cares about the rest of the planet. Financial machination, global crisis caused by faulty US banking system -subprimes-, Greek bankruptcy caused by US bank Goldman & Sachs, US software developer Microsoft forcing global OEM to install Windows thus killing competition and later saved from split by Bush administration, etc...

You really should look deep into yourself and see how the USA is really not that bright country you all believe in so much. A little introspection once in a while is good. Go, travel overseas or just to your Canadian neighbors, watch the differences, learn from the others, and stop that crap before it is too late.

The way you just accept this matter of fact by raising your shoulders and telling it's Obama's decision for the good of the USA tells a lot about your mindset.

"I reject your reality and substitute my own" (c) Adam Savage


Reply Parent Score: 5