Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Aug 2013 09:36 UTC
Legal Recently, the ITC ruled in favour of Samsung, issuing an exclusion order against certain Apple products, barring them from being sold in the US. Several people have called upon president Obama to step in and overrule the decision (e.g. this guy) - however, not only would this set a very bad precedent for non-US companies, it would also simply be incredibly unfair if you actually look at the ITC ruling itself. Because of this, it is quite unlikely that Obama will step in.
Thread beginning with comment 568683
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
wrong as usual
by kristoph on Fri 2nd Aug 2013 04:13 UTC
kristoph
Member since:
2006-01-01

Honestly I struggle to understan how you can not see the obvious lack of logic in your arguments.

Consider that this case is about, never mind the players. Company A has used an international organization to ban the devices of Company B from sale in the United States using, arguably, a standards essential patent.

Now the devices are old and Company A has a crapload of money (and you don't like Company A) so you somehow think this should be considered 'ok'. Or wait, you don't think it's 'ok' but you don't think anyone should stop it because it's a bad precedent and because of the nature of the negotiations between company A and B.

Consider what this will do to ANY smaller company if it is not stopped. Samsung, Apple, or for that matter ANY company will be able to stop the import of devices into the US using a SEP. That's a fucking nightmarish scenario for the industry as a whole, which is why every major software and hardware company in the US (except Google, never mind that hypocrisy) is urging the US government to do something to prevent this.

If Company A did all the things the ITC says it did wrong Company B should sue, get it's argument in front of a 'jury of it's peers' and get whatever money it is owed. Banning a company from a market based on some backroom analysis is absurd. To argue that to intervene to stop this is wrong is the height of idiocy. But you already know this, you just can't get beyond your 'waa Apple started this their a bully fuck them even if it means you fuck the world' just shows you can't see beyond your own bias.

Frankly I am going to be pretty shocked if the US Trade Commissioner does not veto this (or likely, 'put the decision on hold, pending further review' or some other gov speak).

Reply Score: 1

RE: wrong as usual
by Beta on Fri 2nd Aug 2013 09:34 in reply to "wrong as usual"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

Company A has used an international organization to ban the devices of Company B from sale in the United States using, arguably, a standards essential patent.


ITC isn’t international, its a US organisation. This is also not a standards essential patent. Maybe this is why you struggle.

If you fear international/global trade bans, you should be campaigning to prevent ACTA/related agreements.

Reply Parent Score: 4