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 568926
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: do not understand
by MOS6510 on Mon 5th Aug 2013 10:53 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: do not understand"
Member since:

"The difference between men and boys is the price of their toys" means that men will remain "boys", they just buy more expensive toys. Like a car, snowboard, sound system, anti-gravity pool, etc... It has nothing to do with Apple.

BTW it must be hard to support Apple and avoid them at the same time.

I too work with a number of different system, I just don't have formed a hatred for a company.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: do not understand
by Janvl on Mon 5th Aug 2013 11:02 in reply to "RE[5]: do not understand"
Janvl Member since:

I do not hate apple. I just do not buy there stuff for many reasons.

Supporting a platform as closed as apple is no big deal, there is not much one is allowed to do in the os, on mac's at least one has a shell-prompt.

I do not know what your problem with linux on the desktop is but I have been using it for over 8 years now and it does everything I need.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[7]: do not understand
by MOS6510 on Mon 5th Aug 2013 11:13 in reply to "RE[6]: do not understand"
MOS6510 Member since:

My problem with desktop Linux is being a married working father with a dog. This means time is not a luxury. Also I need my computer at home for work. So I do not have the means to spend hours fixing things.

I jumped on the Linux bandwagon in 1998 like a lot of my friends, but when Windows 2000 arrived they all jumped back. I managed to hold out until 2005, having tried a number of distributions from Red Hat to SuSE to Slackware to Debian to Ubuntu.

The GUI side of things is just too buggy, OS upgrades tend to break stuff, even small updates do. The CLI side is much much better. A lot of GUI software is of poor quality.

I still have Linux machines around and tend to play with them, but I'd never use one as my main machine. At work I try to promote Linux servers over Windows ones.

Now I have iMacs, MacBooks, iPhone, iPods, iPad, AppleTVs and a number of other Apple devices/computers, old and new. Sure they have their restrictions and downsides, but they tend to always work and save me a LOT of time.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: do not understand
by zima on Thu 8th Aug 2013 21:17 in reply to "RE[5]: do not understand"
zima Member since:

anti-gravity pool


Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: do not understand
by MOS6510 on Thu 8th Aug 2013 21:52 in reply to "RE[6]: do not understand"
MOS6510 Member since:

Anti-gravity in itself is very weak, but if you just add water you can float without swimming.

At first it's a bit weird, because you think you do need to swim, but after a very short while you get used to it.

It's very populair over here, but that also makes it annoying because the pools are full of people that "just float" meaning they don't pay any attention and keep bumping in to you.

The funny thing is you pay to go the the pool and NOT swim and it's more expensive than pools where you do have to swim.

Reply Parent Score: 2