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 568904
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Speak with your wallet
by Kochise on Mon 5th Aug 2013 06:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Speak with your wallet"
Kochise
Member since:
2006-03-03

Crippled experience may I say. Developers are conforming to the strict and limiting Apple rules to be allowed to release their application on the AppStore. And when an application obviously makes money, Apple copy it, "improve its own offering" then ditch the original Application because it creates a duplicate functionality. How smart for the users' experience POV.

But I agree, the specs are not everything. That's why I stick to my aging yet comfortable HTC Evo 3D. It just provides my with what I need. And have a replaceable battery and a microSD slot.

Kochise

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Speak with your wallet
by MOS6510 on Mon 5th Aug 2013 06:49 in reply to "RE[2]: Speak with your wallet"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Crippled experience may I say. Developers are conforming to the strict and limiting Apple rules to be allowed to release their application on the AppStore. And when an application obviously makes money, Apple copy it, "improve its own offering" then ditch the original Application because it creates a duplicate functionality. How smart for the users' experience POV.


Do you have any examples of that? I know of Apple making their own app that does what an existing app does, but I'm not aware of those apps being taken down.


But I agree, the specs are not everything. That's why I stick to my aging yet comfortable HTC Evo 3D. It just provides my with what I need. And have a replaceable battery and a microSD slot.


That's good news. Personally I've never had to replace a battery. My iPhone 3G still works and I have even older phones (Nokia) that still work fine. By the time the battery dies it makes much more sense to buy the latest generation phone. I'm already up 2 phones from the 3G.

Reply Parent Score: 2