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 568894
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Speak with your wallet
by brichpmr on Sun 4th Aug 2013 22:53 UTC in reply to "Speak with your wallet"
brichpmr
Member since:
2006-04-22

I don't like Apple the company mostly because of its corporate bullying practices and the way it tightly controls how buyers use its products. Moreover I find Apple products to be technically inferior to its competition's products (slower processors, less RAM and no SD expansion ports for example) while also being overtly overpriced compared to competing, higher spec products. Why Apple's cult of followers wait in line for hours to buy this junk simply defies logic. I don't buy iAnything from Apple and never will! Every time I use my ASUS Android tablet or my Samsung Galaxy Nexus or my simple generic $20.00 mp3 player or even my Linux powered desktop or netbook I give the proverbial finger to Apple and it's highfalutin crap.


No, you merely show that you are making 'crap' personal decisions.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[2]: Speak with your wallet
by Soulbender on Mon 5th Aug 2013 08:57 in reply to "RE: Speak with your wallet"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

No, you merely show that you are making 'crap' personal decisions.


Only in the RDF could not choosing Apple be a 'crap' personal decision.

Reply Parent Score: 5

brichpmr Member since:
2006-04-22

"No, you merely show that you are making 'crap' personal decisions.


Only in the RDF could not choosing Apple be a 'crap' personal decision.
"


No, also in a world where OSX and IOS are but one of multiple platforms used.

Reply Parent Score: 1

kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

Only in the RDF could not choosing Apple be a 'crap' personal decision.


Wasn't the whole issue that he was choosing Apple?

Reply Parent Score: 2