Obama administration faces veto decision on ruling in Apple-Samsung fight

“Smartphone rivals Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. have dueled over patents in courts around the globe,” Brent Kendall and Ian Sherr report for The Wall Street Journal. “Now they are sparring in front of the Obama administration, which faces a looming decision on whether to veto a trade body’s order blocking the U.S. sale of some Apple devices.”

“At issue is a June ruling from the U.S. International Trade Commission, an increasingly hot venue for patent fights, that said Apple infringed on a Samsung patent and ordered a ban on some older-model Apple iPhones and iPads,” Kendall and Sherr report. “Antitrust officials from the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission are also weighing in on the ruling, according to people familiar with the matter. The two agencies have been vocal over the past year with concerns that companies may be unfairly harming competition when they assert essential technology patents in lawsuits to block rivals’ products from the marketplace.”

Kendall and Sherr report, “U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman has the authority to make the final decision on whether to allow the ITC ban. It is rare for a presidential administration to veto an ITC order, the most recent instance occurring in 1987. If Mr. Froman doesn’t intervene, the ban would take effect on Aug. 4… BSA, a trade group representing software makers including Microsoft Corp. and Oracle Corp. and chip maker Intel Corp., said the use of essential industry patents to ban products shouldn’t be allowed except under unusual circumstances.”

Read more in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
Verizon calls on Obama to veto coming iPhone ban by U.S. ITC – July 25, 2013
Where’s the U.S. DOJ? Samsung takes extortionate position against Apple in new ITC filing – July 17, 2013
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

26 Comments

  1. Worse comes to worst, the iPhone 4/S disappear and are quickly replaced with the iPhone 5C. There are rumors that the iPhone 5 will cease production after the 5S debuts, so Tim might be planning to get rid of all the old iPhones and make us choose between the 5C and 5S for all we know.

    The iPad 5 is then released and the iPad 4 will be left on the market at a discounted rate to fill the void of the iPad 2. Hell, who really needs a new iPad 2 with the iPad mini on the market? It was probably nearing the end of its run anyway.

    In the end this could be a mere inconvience. Tim’s probably already factored it all in. No responsible CEO would sit on his ass expecting the president to do something that was last done when we were still performing duck and cover nuke drills.

  2. Pop stars wrote songs about him before he was even elected. Across the world people cried with happiness when he was elected. Everyone thought he would put the US where it belonged…the land that protects freedoms and liberty. He turned out to be even worse than Bush. What a disaster.

    Don’t expect anything decent from this guy.

    1. I cheered when he was elected. I’m now very sorry to see that he’s somewhere between Bush and Nixon in his ethics and hunger for power. What a disappointment.

        1. Yes, manipulated by being offered a choice that was guaranteed to be just as bad or worse. It was not the voters who were manipulated, but the party system. The fringe Conservatives own the Republicans, and the fringe Socialists own the Democrats. Both parties are controlled by totalitarians. It doesn’t matter how one votes.

  3. You mean songs such as this one:

    Cult of Personality

    Look in my eyes, what do you see?
    The cult of personality
    I know your anger, I know your dreams
    I’ve been everything you want to be
    I’m the cult of personality
    Like Mussolini and Kennedy
    I’m the cult of personality
    The cult of personality
    The cult of personality

    Neon lights, a Nobel prize
    Than the mirror speaks, the reflection lies
    You won’t have to follow me
    Only you can set me free

    I sell the things you need to be
    I’m the smiling face on your tv
    I’m the cult of personality
    I exploit you, still you love me
    I tell you one and one makes three
    I’m the cult of personality
    Like Joseph Stalin and Gandhi
    I’m the cult of personality
    The cult of personality
    The cult of personality

    Neon lights, a Nobel prize
    When a leader speaks, that leader dies
    You won’t have to follow me
    Only you can set you free (?)

    You gave me fortune
    You gave me fame
    You gave me power in your god’s name
    I’m every person you need to be
    I’m the cult of personality (I’m the cult of, I’m the cult of)
    I’m the cult of, I’m the cult of, I’m the cult of, I’m the cult of (I’m the cult of)
    I’m the cult of, I’m the cult of, I’m the cult of, I’m the cult of personality (I’m the cult of)

  4. Just hope Apple iBooks appeal can get to Supreme Court before Obama gets another appointee ,who will likely be Eric Holder who would have to sit out the decision. But a 4 to 4 tie would go agiant the Apple.

    1. Not necessarily. The lower court would likely be the US Court of Appeals. So if they found for Apple, then the DOJ appealed, and there was a 4/4 tie, then the decision would go in favor of Apple.

      And do you honestly think Obama would nominate Holder? He would have to recuse himself from so many cases for so many years that he would have no influence on the court.

  5. A story of one private company suing another and the ensuing court rulings is intentionally being turned into a political debate by taking the emphasis away from the original story by writing the “Obama Admin”.

    MDN web traffic must be falling badly as in the recent past MDN has chosen to use the word “Obama” as lead in several stories were the president’s office had no relevancy to the matter.

    In this case MDN could have just said the executive branch but it chose to use Obama which seems to infuriate the vast majority of reads here on MDN.

    1. US Trade Representative Michael Froman has the option to veto the ITC ruling before the ban goes into effect but the order will have to come from Obama. MDN is correct in framing this in the Obama Administration’s court. I’m tired of the buck not stopping at Obama.

      1. You’re only proving my point.

        With respect to:
        “I’m tired of the buck not stopping at Obama.”

        That’s called being honest.

        The republicans/Tea party are the only people that believe Obama inherited 4% unemployment, 14K stock market, 3/4 of Americans owning homes, two wars that were paying for themselves and the US auto industry making record sells.

        Nothing could be further from the truth, including republicans.

  6. “BSA, a trade group representing software makers including Microsoft Corp. and Oracle Corp. and chip maker Intel Corp., said the use of essential industry patents to ban products shouldn’t be allowed except under unusual circumstances.”

    Everyone except the ITC saw the dangerous precedent this set. If Obama doesn’t intervene, then it is clear evidence of bias towards Apple.

  7. In the end, this ban only applies to ‘old’ products and products that are offered by AT&T.

    It’s really all about principal and you know something is wrong when Verizon’s lawyers are even saying the ban should be vetoed.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.