x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Verizon asks the President to veto the upcoming ITC sales ban of Apple iPhone 4

Verizon asks the President to veto the upcoming ITC sales ban of Apple iPhone 4

Verizon asks the President to veto the upcoming ITC sales ban of Apple iPhone 4
An ITC ordered sales ban against certain older Apple devices is supposed to take effect starting August 5th. Out of the models affected by the order, only the Apple iPhone 4 and the Apple iPad 2 remain on retailer's shelves. Because Apple uses the iPhone 4 as a low cost version of its smartphone (similar to how the Apple iPhone Lite will be positioned), a sales ban on the phone will have ramifications on Cupertino.

The sales ban comes after the the ITC ruled against Apple in a patent infringement suit. Right now, the sales ban is on hold pending a 60 day presidential review that expires on August 4th. Speaking of President Obama, Verizon's general counsel, Randal S. Milch, had an editorial published in the Wall Street Journal earlier this week, asking for the president to intervene in this case. The version of the Apple iPhone 4 involved in the sales ban is the AT&T flavored model, so Big Red doesn't have an interest in this case at all, but Milch's editorial says that Verizon is concerned about the precedent that a sales ban would set.

Milch wants President Obama to veto the ITC decision, a move that no president has taken since 1987. He also pointed out three situations where the president needs to step in. One is when the patent holder isn't using the patented technology. Another would be when the patent holder has already agreed to license a patent on FRAND terms. The third situation is when the infringing part isn't important to the overall product and isn't what drives consumer demand for it. You can read the entire editorial at the sourcelink.

Apple has appealed the order with the U.S. Court of Appeals, which is hearing arguments from both sides on August 9th.

"What we have warned is that patent litigation at the ITC—where the only remedy is to keep products from the American public—is too high-stakes a game for patent disputes. The fact that the ITC's intellectual-property-dispute docket has nearly quadrupled over 15 years only raises the stakes further. Smartphone patent litigation accounts for a substantial share of that increase."-Randal S. Milch, Verizon general counsel

source: WSJ via AppleInsider   

67 Comments
  • Options
    Close






posted on 25 Jul 2013, 13:47 35

1. ckoch125 (Posts: 192; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)


Hey Verizon..... F U you greedy bastards

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 13:54 7

2. Reluctant_Human (Posts: 889; Member since: 28 Jun 2012)


"The version of the Apple iPhone 4 involved in the sales ban is the AT&T flavored model, so Big Red doesn't have an interest in this case at all, but Milch's editorial says that Verizon is concerned about the precedent that a sales ban would set."

Not understanding your anger at Verizon as it pertains to this article.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:33 3

10. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)


Verizon is playing BOTH sides of the fence. If you recall, Verizon filed an amicus brief asking the court to deny Apple's request to ban certain Samsung products.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:38 10

13. MartyK (Posts: 846; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)


You mean like they did when HTC phone was stop at the border?..
This is what Apple wanted, they made their bed, let them lay in it!

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:46 9

19. PAPINYC (banned) (Posts: 2315; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)


Thank you, I couldn't think of a more magnanimous company than Verizon. Personally, I would ask the ITC to ban all iDudz not only the iDud 4 but the OG iDud as well as the 3G, GS, 4S and 5, respectively!

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 15:25 3

29. roldefol (Posts: 4332; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)


If he really wants to help the country, Obama should support a ban on all phones not assembled in the US. You're welcome, Motorola.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:58 3

25. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


"Milch's editorial says that Verizon is concerned about the precedent that a sales ban would set."

Where was Milch with his concern when Apple embargoed HTC smartphones? As with HTC, a sales ban is the one thing that could compel Apple to enter a global settlement.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 16:43 3

41. PAPINYC (banned) (Posts: 2315; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)


Thank you !!! +1

For future reference, he's an iMilch!

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 18:51 4

53. joey_sfb (Posts: 6014; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)


Apple has when on record that its doe not need to pay for Samsung's fraud patent which lead to their current situation. All they need to do is to license it like everyone else. Its a standard 3G patents.

This is sheer arrogance on Apple part and they deserved to be ban so that they know they are not above the law and have to play by the book just like everyone else.

If the US president intervene Apple product from being ban while doing for Samsung phone/tablet was being ban in 2011. Its biased pure and simple.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 21:53 2

60. cheetah2k (Posts: 1596; Member since: 16 Jan 2011)


The problem is, it is very likely that Apple will just happen to make a substantial donation to Camp David... Then Obama will overturn the courts decision.. H3ll, Apple could even call on all the donations they made to Obama in the last election...

..and so is the way of the U S of A..

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:55 7

22. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


Sounds like Apple got VZW to do its bidding. Sorry, but when Apple goes and abuses the ITC enforcement process, it has to live with the consequences when Sammy responds in kind. Barry would do well to pass on the request. Sauce for the goose being sauce for the gander and what-not.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 19:11

56. stealthd (unregistered)


Not really. Sounds more like Verizon just doesn't want it to become easier for products they sell the get banned. Same thing happened when a Samsung phone was banned.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 17:05 6

46. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)


Hey ITC stop kissing the govt a$$. They deserve a BAN.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 23:28

64. willard12 (Posts: 1722; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)


The ITC is the government. I think you mean Verizon.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:03 5

3. PapaSmurf (Posts: 10457; Member since: 14 May 2012)


Well that was unexpected.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 18:54

54. stealthd (unregistered)


They did the same thing when a Samsung phone was banned, so it's not really surprising.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:09 2

4. o0Exia0o (Posts: 900; Member since: 01 Feb 2013)


I dont understand.... Verizon does not have a dog in this fight to begin with.....What are they soo concerned about? You would thank that given the competition between VZW and ATT that VZW might chalk this up as a win as thier version of the Iphone 4 has nothing to do with this.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:17 4

7. Lousclues (Posts: 34; Member since: 02 Mar 2012)


"Verizon is concerned about the precedent that a sales ban would set"

Right there.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:34 3

11. o0Exia0o (Posts: 900; Member since: 01 Feb 2013)


Which would be what?

Honestly I cant say.

Is the precedent in which you refer the one that would be set by the president if he were to veto the ITC import ban there by telling all OEMs that is is ok to steal from each other with out worry that they will have to negotiate and pay a for tech owned by others because nothing will be done to them if they dont?

Is that the precedent that you refer to?

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:55 2

21. Lousclues (Posts: 34; Member since: 02 Mar 2012)


Don't get your panties tide in a knot man, I'm not taking any sides. I'm just pointing out for you why Verizon is concerned lol

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 15:13 2

28. o0Exia0o (Posts: 900; Member since: 01 Feb 2013)


I am not upset...

But you have yet to say anything (Besides what the artical says) about why Verizon is even concerned with this which tells me that you have NO CLUE as to what this is all about.

So to me it just looks like your troling. Thanks for playing anyway and have a good day. ;)

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 15:57

35. Lousclues (Posts: 34; Member since: 02 Mar 2012)


Damn you're a bitter guy lol. You need some p*ssy like right now.

You have yourself a splendid day too sir.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 16:27

40. o0Exia0o (Posts: 900; Member since: 01 Feb 2013)


Not bitter just looking for mental stimulation in an arguement, which it seems you are unable provide.

Thank you any ways though. Have a wonderful day.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 15:47

33. Commentator (Posts: 3709; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)


I think that pretty much sums up the precedent right there. I'm not sure Verizon would outright admit to being in favor of companies stealing ideas from each other, but they more or less imply it when they say the industry "is too high-stakes a game for patent disputes."

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 16:19 1

39. o0Exia0o (Posts: 900; Member since: 01 Feb 2013)


OK, and Ill agree with you on that.

My point is this though, Apple got caught with stolen tech, that they implemented it in to thier products and sold said products for a profit. Why should they get a free pass?

think of it like this, if you get caught robbing your EX's house (red handed with stolen property on you as you try to escape), witnesses to the crime pick you out of a line up and your finger prints are all over the crime scene. Does it make it right if you have a have a friend that is buddies with the Governor to ask him to throw out the verdict in your case and for you not to get punshed?

The way I look at it is Apple got caught red handed. If the roles were reversed and Samsung was in Apples position I would still say the same thing, but this has to stop. All of these patent trials and patent trolls need to be shut down. In this day and age with as much money as these companys have you would think that they would be able to come to an agreement that would be profitable for both. And I am not just tired of hearing about the Apple/Samsung BS, but all of it between every company.

And while I agree with you on your point I still dont see what VZW's stake in this whole thing. They just need to mind thier own buisness.

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 22:48

62. McLTE (Posts: 874; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


it's obvious. Verizon's stake in this whole thing is this: They are in the business to sell phones. If this phone gets banned, they are worried that there will be a slew of future phone that get banned that just may be on Verizon.

This clearly shows that verizon doesn't care who does what.. they just want to sell phones!

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:12 9

5. roldefol (Posts: 4332; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)


Don't you think the president has more pressing matters on his mind than bans against particular models of phone? Don't we want the government OUT of business matters?

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:16 4

6. Reluctant_Human (Posts: 889; Member since: 28 Jun 2012)


He needs something to cover all the horrible press he's getting between the NSA, Guantanemo, IRS scandal, etc

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:24

8. roldefol (Posts: 4332; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)


Yet another second term scandal. Vietnam, Watergate, Iran-Contra, Monica, Katrina...

posted on 25 Jul 2013, 14:43 2

18. quakan (Posts: 1381; Member since: 02 Mar 2011)


All 3 haven't really been scandals with the President at the center of them. All of those have targets of separate entities. He's actually managed to keep those targets off his back.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories