“As expected, the Office of Unfair Import Investigations (OUII, commonly referred to as the ‘ITC staff’) and Samsung oppose Apple’s motion to stay the ITC’s remedial orders over a FRAND-pledged standard-essential patent (SEP),” Florian Müller writes for FOSS Patents. “The ITC staff takes the same positions as in the build-up to the import ban, which the Commission adopted (at least the staff’s latest filing does mention Commissioner Pinkert’s dissent).Samsung’s opposition brief, which I have uploaded to Scribd, shows a serious antitrust issue that no public filing or statement by Samsung itself revealed before in such a flagrant form.”

“Now that the ITC has failed to ensure consistency of its position on tying with established antitrust principles, Samsung still doesn’t have the right to take extortionate positions,” Müller writes, “which comes down to saying: ‘Apple, you have three choices. You can pay us 2.4% on a cash-only basis. You can give us a cross-license on terms you don’t like. Or you’ll face exclusion of your older iPhones and iPads in a few weeks.'”

Müller writes, “This. Is. Hold-up.”

“The European Commission has done a far better job protecting consumers in its market. Last December Samsung withdrew all of its SEP-based injunction requests pending in the European Union. Nevertheless the European Commission issued a Statement of Objections (SO),” Müller writes. “By contrast, the DOJ has been doing nothing. At some point it has to intervene. If it tolerates this kind of extortionate conduct for much longer, some people may start to wonder whether the current U.S. government (including, in a different context, U.S. Customs & Border Protection) is more loyal to Google than to U.S. consumers and the U.S. economy.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Where’s the U.S. DOJ? Siting around with their thumb up their collective ass when they’re not actively making bad decisions, as usual. A fish rots from the head down.

Related articles:
Samsung, EU in talks to settle antitrust case involving FRAND abuse against Apple – June 25, 2013
Japan finds Samsung guilty of FRAND abuse – March 5, 2013
FRAND abuse: Samsung could face $15 billion fine for trying to ban Apple iPhone via standard-essential patents – December 28, 2012
FTC staff said to formally recommend antitrust lawsuit against Google over FRAND abuse – November 1, 2012
Google U.S. antitrust lawsuit said to be urged by FTC investigators over Internet search, FRAND abuse – October 15, 2012
U.S. FTC investigating Google, Motorola Mobility over FRAND abuse – June 30, 2012
EU launches full-blown investigation of Samsung’s suspected abuse of FRAND-pledged patents; Motorola on notice – January 31, 2012
Apple asked standards body to set rules for essential FRAND patents – February 8, 2012
Apple’s iterative approach to FRAND abuse is not for the faint of heart, but there’s no better alternative – February 5, 2012
Motorola Mobility wants 2.25% of Apple’s sales for standards-essential wireless patents license – February 4, 2012
EU launches full-blown investigation of Samsung’s suspected abuse of FRAND-pledged patents; Motorola on notice – January 31, 2012
EU opens antitrust investigation into Samsung over patents – January 31, 2012
European Commission investigates Samsung over possible abuse of FRAND patents against Apple – November 3, 2011
Why is Samsung attempting to ban Apple’s iPhone 4S over FRAND patents? – October 5, 2011