U.S. ITC delays decision in Apple’s case against Samsung

The U.S. International Trade Commission said on Thursday evening that it needs more time to decide whether Samsung Electronics Co. smartphones should be banned from the U.S. based on a patent-infringement claim brought by Apple Inc.

The U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington said it will announce its decision Aug. 9.

MacDailyNews Take: Justice delayed is justice denied.

Related articles:
Obama has less than 48 hours to save Apple’s iPhone 4 – August 1, 2013
Obama administration faces veto decision on ruling in Apple-Samsung fight – July 29, 2013
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. Without proof, yet I already assume that there are important individuals in ITC, who have been benefitted much from the stock price fluctuations of Apple Inc. given all these discouraging patents news.

  2. I give up on Apple ever seeing any justice for any of these patent disputes or the ebook case.

    I have a really hard time digesting the fact Apple is not supported at all by our government, but meanwhile they bend over backwards for scum like Samsung.

  3. This is complete and utter garbage. There was no delay on the ruling to ban the iPhone. AND that decision is widely panned because Samsung did not operate under fair and reasonable licensing rules, trying to overcharge their competitor, Apple. But when Apple has a much more legitimate complaint, they delay it? I think we need a full investigation. I would not be surprised to see illegal gifts from Samsung or somebody working for Samsung going to ITC officials behind closed doors. What other explanation could there be?

  4. As much as I love my country, the U.S. will always push justice aside for cash, even if it means hurting one of their own. Republicans and democrats need to go.

  5. So the question more and more these days is, ‘Why even patent something?”

    Why not just wait until someone has a great idea and copy it? By the time anything comes of a patent suit, the product and it’s worthiness will be long gone. Tack onto that the lack of any meaningful penalties and one really has to wonder why one would go through the trouble and expense of filing for a patent.

    1. “Why not just wait until someone has a great idea and copy it?”

      Some months ago in an article about R&D, a samsung exec said that samsung’s primary purpose was not about development from within but in building by market development . . . meaning watching the market, what is working, copy that. This is not speculation, but their specific purpose in development for sales – see what sells good, copy it without development costs, move on to the next big thing, etc.

      I think most people do not realize that some cultures see absolutely no wrong in copying and huge corporations have been and are created with that one purpose in mind.

  6. Apple does not give bribes. As a 9 year employee of Apple I know this to be true. It gives us a disadvantage in China, Mexico and here at home. On the other hand Samsung has a history of paying students and news organizations and others to spread FUD and worse. I do prefer Apples stand and payoffs but it does cost us.

Reader Feedback

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