Verizon asking Obama to veto any device ban that might result from the mobile industry patent wars
To put things in perspective - the International Trade Commission became the go-to body on patent infringement lawsuits and counter-lawsuits for the mobile industry, since the regular courts are fairly bound by a Supreme Court decision in an eBay case from 2006. The precedent made it harder to win an import ban on infringing products there, with the most likely settlement being cross-licensing of patents, or cash in hand.
While the whole ordeal reminds us of kids collecting baseball cards, the recent ban Apple won on the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe, which actually resulted in the German market currently missing Samsung's latest tablet, is an example what harm these lawsuits can bring to a company, instead of all focusing on innovation and fair competition, as has been the intention of the patent system when originally created.
Patent-trolling won't go overnight, but if the President steps in to stop the litigation madness in the mobile industry, which is currently one of the few growth areas, this would make anyone think twice before they rush to ask for a product ban quickie to the ITC. Regular courts' decisions will still matter, though, but the battles there are long and protracted.
1. som (Posts: 768; Member since: 10 Nov 2009)
Apple is very crazy company by started patent lawsuits against Samsung.
Samsung must stop dealing and selling any components to rotten Apple now until all patent lawsuits are drop forever.
5. iankellogg (Posts: 155; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
samsung is so very large and has so much money invested in Apple I can't imagine them just dropping all business with them. Also their phone products are very disconnected from their component business.
9. remixfa (Posts: 14252; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
the mobile sector that supplies samsung phones and apple parts is the same wing of samsung..
while I would love to watch samsung just stop supplying apple as a strong arm move to make steve jobs behave, i doubt it would happen because they make so much money, and they probably have a multibillion dollar penalty in the supply contract for that kidn of stuff.
14. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Why are you so worried? If Samsung is not guilty, then there's no reason to worry. If Apple has a legitimate case, then why should anyone stop them from exercising their rights?
15. darth8ball (Posts: 519; Member since: 02 Aug 2011)
Because the aim of these liscencing patents allow for money to be paid to use them. Not to allow for shutting down a competitive product. Intellectual Property patents are ment to work hand in hand with Anti-Monopoly laws.
Apple wants to use the courts to help them do away with the competition, but Samsung having to pay, or to have to negotiate into their component deal with Apple is what makes business work for all.
Stopping the sale of products in countries puts people out of work, to do so would be harmful to any countries economy. This goes way beyond Apple and Steve Jobs' egos. This is bad for alot of people, not just cell phone users.
17. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Whoever owns the idea should get credit for it, and whoever uses their idea, should pay for it. It's as simple as that. Apple is merely exercising their rights. The courts merely follow laws and policies. Apple has no influence to the court's decision. The ban would not take place if their was no infringement. Arresting and putting a stop to druglords also causes unemployment to those involved in those crimes, so should the court let drug trafficking be? Of course not. If Samsung or any company stole IP's, they should be reprimanded and they should correct what needs to be rectified.
2. Adam Leonard (unregistered)
There is absolutely no way that Obama would meet this request, particularly before the election. Doing so would infuriate business and allow his opponents to more easily paint him as anti-capitalist/pro-collectivist. The patent system is absolutely broken but the voting public won't get it and Obama has proven unable to be able to simplify issues so that they can understand them. The Republicans will trot out the trope of the hard working lone inventor, the little guy with the big idea, and say that Obama is going to let others steal his idea.
7. Jason Bugle (unregistered)
What is an anti-capitalist? How would overriding an ITC ruling be practicing anti-capitalism? What is a pro-collectivist? Does the voting public need to understand patents of mobile devices?
3. krysis (Posts: 76; Member since: 14 Dec 2009)
it's really sad that it has gone this far, that they have to bring the president in to deal with this tit-for-tat bs that's going on in the industry right now. i think everyone can agree that he has more important things to worry about than the banning of some products. very disappointing
6. ChiquiKon (Posts: 58; Member since: 26 Jul 2011)
I do Agree with Krysis, President shouldn' t be bother with this.
And eventhough Adam' s point is valid about the anti-capitalists view, Americans overall don' t like to be said what they can or can' t buy (we all want to buy whatever we want) and that' s exactly where Apple has put itself.
8. chack_fu (Posts: 46; Member since: 19 Jan 2009)
This just shows that VZW knows that iphones arent the bulk of the business. Blocking Android phones means lower bottom lines from the giant and all others!
10. Third Eye (unregistered)
I am totally fed up with the US Patent system granting patents for obviousness, that leads to heavy patent trolling and blackmail. And the various Apple and MS against Android needs to go to hell.
That being said, let us see. When Obama admin tried to introduce the concept of Net Neutrality (NN) , in law, Verizon has worked overtime(including others) to
a) bad mouth the concept
b) publically chided Obama and Genachowski headed FCC and say that they are trying to have outreach in various aspects of "economy"
Consider the plaint of Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg, head of the Business Roundtable, which has been playing footsie with the Obama administration for most of the last 18 months. “By reaching into virtually every sector of economic life,” Seidenberg recently wrote, “government is injecting uncertainty into the marketplace and making it harder to raise new capital and create new businesses.”
c) They convinced Google to join them in neutralizing the NN for mobile networks.
Now they have the F****ing nerve to ask OBAMA to actually interfere and in their "economic" life. They have some nerve!
11. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Ridiculous. If Obama vetoes the ban for products infringing on other products designs, then might as well get rid of patents.
12. remyrz (Posts: 193; Member since: 28 Oct 2010)
omg guys... apple won s**t... they just got 1 infringement to samsung.. only 1.. and they will roll an update to keep the selling... >.>... and.. yes.. this should has a control... i hate apple... but i dont want apple to get ban bcuz diversity is what made us humans.. so.. is good to have lots of options out there.. but apple plz.. take it easy and keep improving and innovating not lawtsuiting... gosh...
13. remyrz (Posts: 193; Member since: 28 Oct 2010)
I believe in payments rather than bannins... u_u
18. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 6946; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
Apple think they own the cell phone industry. They want to keep every company like SAMSUNG from selling products all over the world and BANNED THEM. APPLE is just too afraid of Samsung and it's mobile products.