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.

Thread beginning with comment 568881
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Speak with your wallet
by cmost on Sun 4th Aug 2013 20:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Speak with your wallet"
cmost
Member since:
2006-07-16

Hmmm. Interesting

you slate Apple for NOT having a removable SD Card and then go onto praise 'Samsung Galaxy Nexus' which according to this --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_Nexus

states that it has no removable storage.

Am I correct or is this a case of 'white man speak with forked tongue?'

Please correct me if I am wrong. I will accept a slap on the wrist.


Yes I am aware of that obviously but I chose to forgo the SD expansion slot on my Nexus phone because I felt that having a Google phone without carrier garbage and one that gets instant updates to Android far outweighed the lack of expansion. By the way, the reason why Nexus devices lack expansion is because Google refuses to pay a licensing fee to Microsoft for exFAT which it finagled as the default file system for SD specification. The only Nexus device that had an expansion card was the original Nexus One.

Reply Parent Score: 3