Samsung sheds over $1 billion in market value after U.S. Trade Representative Froman vetoes Apple ban

“The South Korean government on Monday expressed concern over the Obama administration’s decision to veto an import ban on some Apple Inc. products in the U.S., saying the decision may negatively impact Samsung Electronics Co.’s patent rights,” Min-Jeong Lee reports for The Wall Street Journal.

“In a statement, the government said it would closely watch the U.S. International Trade Commission’s decision Friday, when the trade body is expected to decide whether to ban U.S. imports of certain Samsung Galaxy mobile products following an earlier Apple complaint alleging patent violation,” Lee reports. “Should the ITC decide to ban the Galaxy products subject to the decision Friday, legal experts say Samsung may opt to lobby for a similar veto. The products that are subject to a ban include Samsung’s older models such as the Galaxy S, Galaxy S II and Galaxy Tab 10.1, among others.”

“More than $1 billion was wiped off Samsung’s market value on Monday after the surprise veto, with shares ending 0.9% lower at 1,274,000 won [$1.133 billion]. The South Korean company declined to provide comments Monday on what it expects from the International Trade Commission later this week,” Lee reports. “Over the weekend, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman made the decision to veto the ban on some Apple devices, citing concerns about patent holders gaining ‘undue leverage’ as well as potential harm to consumers a ban would bring.”

Lee reports, “Samsung is expected to continue to pursue its patent cases through various courts, though in the longer term it would make sense for the two companies to strike a royalty deal on patents, legal experts say.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: $1 billion is a drop in the bucket considering how much the thieving bastages have already stolen from Apple.

Related articles:
How the ITC blew it, forcing a presidential veto in the Samsung-Apple patent case – August 5, 2013
Apple: ‘Samsung was wrong to abuse the patent system’ – August 5, 2013
South Korea concerned about U.S. decision to overrule Apple iPhone, iPad sales ban – August 5, 2013
Obama administration vetoes Apple iPhone sales ban in U.S. – August 3, 2013
Google ready to ditch Android over its intellectual property issues? – July 29, 2013

22 Comments

  1. The thing that most articles seem to omit, is the fundamental difference in the patent types being decided upon.

    The ban on Apple products was imposed based on Samsung’s SEP/FRAND patents, and that they were refusing to offer them on FRAND terms. Most specifically they demanded Apple cross license non-FRAND patents. The veto was issued not because ”merica’s protecting its own”, but because the ban never should have happened in the first place due to SEP/FRAND patent abuse.

    Samsung’s potential ban, on the other hand, is for violation of non-FRAND/SEP patents. They implemented features Apple developed for their specific products, aren’t essential for operating a cellular device and aren’t pledged to any standard.

    It’d be like if Bridgestone told Toyota they couldn’t put tires on their cars until they allowed Bridgestone to implement Toyota’s synergy-drive system in some new competing product.

    It’s downright dishonest for anyone to try to compare the two as if they’re the same thing.

    1. Samsung is wrong in demanding a cross license deal of SEP’s for non-SEP’s. To me, I see the demanding of cross licensing by Samsung an admission of guilt? I know it can be argued the other way that licensing will cost both companies less than litigation. It seems Samsung knows how to play the US court system and is going to play hardball.

  2. High-priced opinions, indeed: “it would make sense for the two companies to strike a royalty deal on patents, legal experts say.”
    It would be simpler for Samsung to drop the extortion tactics.

  3. I don’t think overturning the ban would have come as a complete surprise to Samsung.

    The proper remedy for standards essential patents is not through an injunction banning the importation of the infringing product but to seek a claim for damages assessed by the court for patent royalties outstanding.

    1. Europe already shut samsung down for trying this type thing. The judges go so pissed that even after samsung decided to just walk away from any SEP patent lawsuit, the still issued an official letter condeming Samsungs actions.

      Even in the US, several government agencies have noted that you cannot do an injunction for a SEP FRAND patent.

  4. How disingenuous of South Korean officials not to know or acknowledge that Samsung was in the wrong here and pretend as though Samsung’s patent rights were being ignored instead of being used as criminal blackmail & hold up. This case has particular SEP/FRAND vs design patent delineators that Shamdung supporters foreign & domestic try to ignore as if they are one, trying to create a sense of faux mock outrage. Nice try but everyone is on to you.

  5. Samsung got what they deserved, NOTHING!
    Apple is still owed a Billion more with there win in an actual property patent that the courts are unwilling to process and keep delaying. I hope Samsung loses a lot more in the future. There business practices have shown they are shady, unwilling to follow international standards, lie in advertising and lie in there specs to get an upper hand.
    To try and blackmail Apple to hand over patents for there intelectual property namely the iPhone for a FRAND license should not have gotten to this point in the first place. The ITC had no legal basis to offer a ban on any Apple property for a FRAND license in the first place. They should be investigated for there actions.

  6. “Should the ITC decide to ban the Galaxy products subject to the decision Friday, legal experts say Samsung may opt to lobby for a similar veto.”

    Good luck with that. Unlike the cowardly deployment of Standards-Essential Patents, which is what Shamsung tried to use to affect a ban (and was the reason they were shot down), Apple’s patents are subject to no such scrutiny.

Add Your Feedback

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