or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › ITC to review Apple's patent infringement claims against Nokia
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ITC to review Apple's patent infringement claims against Nokia

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 
As expected, the U.S. International Trade Commission has agreed to investigate Apple's complaint against handset maker Nokia over alleged patent infringement.

Apple's complaint with the ITC, filed in January, was made in response to Nokia's own ITC complaint in December. The two technology giants are currently engaged in a number of lawsuits accusing the other of violating their respective patents.

According to Bloomberg, the ITC formally agreed this week to review Apple's complaint, which has asked the commission to ban the import of all Nokia handsets.

Weeks ago, the trade agency also agreed to look into Nokia's complaint against Apple, in which the Finnish company requested halting the importation of iPhones, iPods and MacBooks. Nokia's ITC complaint accuses Apple of treading on seven distinct patents applying to user interface, camera, antenna and power management.

The battle first began in October, when Nokia sued Apple over the use of patented wireless standards. Nokia has alleged that the iPhone maker has infringed on GSM and wireless LAN related patents it owns.

Two months later, Apple countersued Nokia over its own patented technologies. Apple has alleged that Nokia has attempted to obtain more money from it than other companies, as well as rights to Apple's intellectual property.

It is the third ITC investigation the Apple is officially involved in. This week the ITC also announced it would look into camera maker Kodak's complaint against Apple, which alleges the iPhone infringes on patents the company owns related to previewing digital images. Handset maker Research in Motion and its line of Blackberries are also targeted in the suit.
post #2 of 46
LOL. Of course you all are over on the sexually explicit removal article chiming in there...
post #3 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Apple has alleged that Nokia has attempted to obtain more money from it than other companies, as well as rights to Apple's intellectual property.

This says it all... I don't care how many "units" Nokia sells, Apple is still handing Nokia its a$$ on a plate in just about every way that matters.

This is about Nokia being vengeful and greedy, and trying to leech off of Apple to cover up for their own inability to compete.
post #4 of 46
It will be interesting to see, when this gets through a court, how much technology a Finnish gumboot company stole in order to make the switch to phones.

http://www.nokianfootwear.fi/eng/our_story/

At least they no longer pulp forests for newsprint.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #5 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

how much technology a Finnish gumboot company stole in order to make the switch to phones.

And the fact that the company is Finnish is relevant exactly how?
post #6 of 46
So you are saying Nokia is not a Finnish company, established in Finland ex-pulper of forests and maker of shoes?

So where did they come from then?

The moon perhaps?

What is the relevance of your questioning this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobrik View Post

And the fact that the company is Finnish is relevant exactly how?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #7 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

It will be interesting to see, when this gets through a court, how much technology a Finnish gumboot company stole in order to make the switch to phones.

http://www.nokianfootwear.fi/eng/our_story/

At least they no longer pulp forests for newsprint.

What is the point of mentioning the race, or the country of the company in question and not actually making a valid point with it, why are you not making an insult to the American side of the equation? Maybe you are too busy killing Kangaroos and making them into cat food?
post #8 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

What is the point of mentioning the race, or the country of the company in question and not actually making a valid point with it

It's because Nokia is trying to stop the imports to America, where infact Nokia sells only a few phones and doesn't even reside. They aren't trying to gain anything, just hurt Apple.

Quote:
why are you not making an insult to the American side of the equation?

Because normal American stereotypes do not work on Apple. You can't call a company fat, because that makes no sense. You can't call a computer company unhealthy, because that doesn't make sense either. You can call Apple stupid, which makes literary sense, but judging by how well Apple is doing, it doesn't make sense in a technological way.

On the other hand, you can use many European stereotypes against Nokia. Cheap, immoral, and jealous are all European stereotypes that work against Nokia.

Quote:
Maybe you are too busy killing Kangaroos and making them into cat food?

One response:

post #9 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

It's because Nokia is trying to stop the imports to America, where infact Nokia sells only a few phones and doesn't even reside. They aren't trying to gain anything, just hurt Apple.

And yet he didn't make the same comment about Kodak, which is, wait a minute an American company.

And Nokia sold around 3.8 million phones in North America in Q4 2009, that is more than "a few".


Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

Because normal American stereotypes do not work on Apple. You can't call a company fat, because that makes no sense. You can't call a computer company unhealthy, because that doesn't make sense either. You can call Apple stupid, which makes literary sense, but judging by how well Apple is doing, it doesn't make sense in a technological way.

Actually there are quite a few that you could use, but unlike the Aussie, I won't bring racial undertones to the discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

On the other hand, you can use many European stereotypes against Nokia. Cheap, immoral, and jealous are all European stereotypes that work against Nokia.

Oh, there are those racial undertones that I was talking about, nothing to add so you just start insulting a whole bunch of people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

One response:

Look things up before posting an ignorant response.
post #10 of 46
Wow, who would have thought that stating the obvious about a company from Finland is some sort of insult.

I'm sure the Finnish people would not consider being from Finland is a racial insult.

Hey, jfanning would you like some more possums?

Have you managed to kill the last lot we sent you?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #11 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

And yet he didn't make the same comment about Kodak, which is, wait a minute an American company.

Does this article have anything to do with Kodak? No? Ok, my point is made.

Quote:
And Nokia sold around 3.8 million phones in North America in Q4 2009, that is more than "a few".

Phone ≠ Smartphone

Quote:
Actually there are quite a few that you could use, but unlike the Aussie, I won't bring racial undertones to the discussion.

You already did buddy, first by calling him an Aussie, and second... Well why don't you take a look at your kangaroo statement.

Quote:
Oh, there are those racial undertones that I was talking about, nothing to add so you just start insulting a whole bunch of people.

They're called stereotypes kid, and if you indicate in a conversation that you are talking about stereotypes, then people don't normally get insulted... Well, unless you talk about someone personally. But did I single a person?

Quote:
Look things up before posting an ignorant response.

Why don't you look things up before you make an ignorant statement. Otherwise you will get an ignorant response.

If you want to argue about this further, then we can take it to PMs.
post #12 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Wow, who would have thought that stating the obvious about a company from Finland is some sort of insult.

The minute you mention one race, and ignore the other it becomes one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Hey, jfanning would you like some more possums?

Have you managed to kill the last lot we sent you?

You might want to check you history a bit, you never sent any possums over to NZ, the governor of the countries at the time (who was from the UK) thought it was a good idea to bring some over. And yes we kill tonnes of them, it is a national passtime did you not know?
post #13 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

Does this article have anything to do with Kodak? No? Ok, my point is made.

the last paragraph of the article...

Quote:
It is the third ITC investigation the Apple is officially involved in. This week the ITC also announced it would look into camera maker Kodak's complaint against Apple, which alleges the iPhone infringes on patents the company owns related to previewing digital images. Handset maker Research in Motion and its line of Blackberries are also targeted in the suit

See those letters K O D A K, they make up the word, Kodak, so yes the article has something to do with Kodak, so your point is nowhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

Phone ≠ Smartphone

To quote you...

Quote:
where infact Nokia sells only a few phones and doesn't even reside

You said phones, you didn't restrict it down to anything else, so if you meant smartphone, then say smartphone, not just phone.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

You already did buddy, first by calling him an Aussie, and second... Well why don't you take a look at your kangaroo statement.

He is from Australia, that makes him an Aussie, or is this one of those things that only that race is allowed to do? And Australias kill their national icon the Kangaroo and make pet food from them, again, we can insult one buch of people, but not Australians or Americans?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

They're called stereotypes kid, and if you indicate in a conversation that you are talking about stereotypes, then people don't normally get insulted... Well, unless you talk about someone personally. But did I single a person?

Well actually you did, you said that Europeans are cheap, immoral and jealous, if I was an european I might take offence with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

Why don't you look things up before you make an ignorant statement. Otherwise you will get an ignorant response.

If you want to argue about this further, then we can take it to PMs.

No, actually I don't understand what you mean, I did look it up, I know it to be a fact, we used to feed our cat Kangaroo meat.
post #14 of 46
[QUOTE=jfanning;1576120]the last paragraph of the article... See those letters K O D A K, they make up the word, Kodak, so yes the article has something to do with Kodak, so your point is nowhere.[quote]

Look kid, it's called a connection. They are connecting that Apple has a lot of lawsuits against them. The article itself does not have anything to do with Kodak, now does it?

Quote:
To quote you...

Your point is not specified.

Quote:
where infact Nokia sells only a few phones and doesn't even reside
You said phones, you didn't restrict it down to anything else, so if you meant smartphone, then say smartphone, not just phone.

I'm sorry, I just assumed since the article is talking about smartphones, and EVERYONE else is talking about smartphones, you would get the connection. I apologize for what I said.

Quote:
He is from Australia, that makes him an Aussie, or is this one of those things that only that race is allowed to do? And Australias kill their national icon the Kangaroo and make pet food from them

Saying that he is an Aussie is not insulting. It's how you say it. I could say someone is 'gay', but it is not insulting unless I state it in a rude manner. Would you be mad if I called you a European? I sure hope not, but you be mad if I called you a typical European? I sure would be. And Australians killing their national icon is their culture, and it is very ethnocentric to insult someone by their culture. Many African tribes would think of us as cruel for using cows for meat. Do you think that is cruel?

Quote:
again, we can insult one buch of people, but not Australians or Americans?

If you said there was a stereotype of Americans being lazy, I wouldn't be offended. If you were saying that Americans were lazy, then I would be offended. There is a difference stating there is a stereotype of someone, and stating the stereotype was true.

Quote:
Well actually you did, you said that Europeans are cheap, immoral and jealous, if I was an european I might take offence with that.

Look at my post again kid, I said there is a stereotype of Europeans being cheap, immoral, and jealous. Did I ever state it was true?

Quote:
No, actually I don't understand what you mean, I did look it up, I know it to be a fact, we used to feed our cat Kangaroo meat.

Ok then, let me explain:

The 'lol wut' post was a point of shock thinking that you actually brought up a stereotype as an insult. I was surprised that you would actually use racial putdowns just to prove their point across.
post #15 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

Look kid, it's called a connection. They are connecting that Apple has a lot of lawsuits against them. The article itself does not have anything to do with Kodak, now does it?

kid? If I am a kid, that must make you about 80, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

I'm sorry, I just assumed since the article is talking about smartphones, and EVERYONE else is talking about smartphones, you would get the connection. I apologize for what I said.

No, the article is talking about Nokia, a communications company asking the ITC to look into Apple whom they believe are violating their patents. Nothing about smartphones in there at all, well unless you just assumed that based on that fact that is all Apple makes, but everyone knows what happens when you assume.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

Saying that he is an Aussie is not insulting. It's how you say it. I could say someone is 'gay', but it is not insulting unless I state it in a rude manner. Would you be mad if I called you a European? I sure hope not, but you be mad if I called you a typical European? I sure would be. And Australians killing their national icon is their culture, and it is very ethnocentric to insult someone by their culture. Many African tribes would think of us as cruel for using cows for meat. Do you think that is cruel?

You are going way off point, the fact of the matter is, why did he mention that fact that Nokia is finnish, and used to make rubber and paper produts many years ago, but made no mention of the nationality, or previous business practices of the two other "American" companies in the article.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

Look at my post again kid, I said there is a stereotype of Europeans being cheap, immoral, and jealous. Did I ever state it was true?

Again, what is up with the "kid" comment, what are you, 20? 25? The minute you say it the rest of what you are trying to say just seems pointless.
post #16 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

kid? If I am a kid, that must make you about 80, right?

Well you are acting immature like one. And you are avoiding my point.

Quote:
No, the article is talking about Nokia, a communications company asking the ITC to look into Apple whom they believe are violating their patents. Nothing about smartphones in there at all, well unless you just assumed that based on that fact that is all Apple makes, but everyone knows what happens when you assume.

Hmm... Nokia is suing Apple over smartphone patents. And Apple is countersuing Nokia over smartphone patents... You're right, I don't see a connection at all.

Quote:
Again, what is up with the "kid" comment, what are you, 20? 25? The minute you say it the rest of what you are trying to say just seems pointless.

Wow, you sure took a lot of offense from that. Usually people don't take offense unless they actually are a kid. You are still avoiding my point though.

Quote:
You are going way off point, the fact of the matter is, why did he mention that fact that Nokia is finnish, and used to make rubber and paper produts many years ago, but made no mention of the nationality, or previous business practices of the two other "American" companies in the article.

Wait... You're seriously offended by him calling Nokia 'Finnish'?

I see no reason to argue further now.
post #17 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

It will be interesting to see, when this gets through a court, how much technology a Finnish gumboot company stole in order to make the switch to phones.

http://www.nokianfootwear.fi/eng/our_story/

Nah. You got it all wrong. It's all about the tires (now Nokian tyres) and the cables (NK cables). You see after a long period of using the cables for morse coded messaging when the weather was so bad that not even Nokia tyres could transport you, they thought of something better as they didn't want to make cables or tyres anymore. They wanted instead to stay at home so that you didn't have to see anyone anymore (cables have to be maintained and you might actually see a scary human being). But you still have to communicatite to order milk and presto the wireless communication device was created!

So you see, nothing to do with the TVs, computers and military communication systems. It's all a derivative of their car tyre and cable businesses.

Regs, Jarkko (a Finn)
post #18 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

Hmm... Nokia is suing Apple over smartphone patents. And Apple is countersuing Nokia over smartphone patents... You're right, I don't see a connection at all.

Actually, not. Unless you adopt the more widely used smartphone definition than what seems to be accepted on these forums.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

But the patents are quite specific technology patents that som of them cover other phones and non-phone devices as well as just smartphones.

Regs, Jarkko
post #19 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

What is the point of mentioning the race, or the country of the company in question and not actually making a valid point with it, why are you not making an insult to the American side of the equation? Maybe you are too busy killing Kangaroos and making them into cat food?

Because Apple is an US company and the EU has been slamming US tech companies for whatever bogus reasons EU companies can think of? It was a BS move to try to keep Apple products from their own home country so I hope they get screwed big time by the US ITC. A little tit for tat would go a long way in keeping the EU from being jerks all the time. Not that I think it's likely that the US ITC will ban Nokia phones in the US but it sure would be nice.
post #20 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

A little tit for tat would go a long way in keeping the EU from being jerks all the time.

Thanks. When we (the Europeans) do something to uphold the law and rules we've both agreed to (dunno, patents for example?), we're jerks, but when you go and do something similar (let alone invade other countries without just cause), that's OK. So we're jerks. Good that that's clear now. Easier to proceed (no need to be courteous anymore I guess).

Regs, Jarkko
post #21 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Because Apple is an US company and the EU has been slamming US tech companies for whatever bogus reasons EU companies can think of? It was a BS move to try to keep Apple products from their own home country so I hope they get screwed big time by the US ITC. A little tit for tat would go a long way in keeping the EU from being jerks all the time. Not that I think it's likely that the US ITC will ban Nokia phones in the US but it sure would be nice.

But it is ok when both companies are American, like when Broadcom took on Qualcomm?
post #22 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen View Post

Thanks. When we (the Europeans) do something to uphold the law and rules we've both agreed to (dunno, patents for example?), we're jerks, but when you go and do something similar (let alone invade other countries without just cause), that's OK. So we're jerks. Good that that's clear now. Easier to proceed (no need to be courteous anymore I guess).

Regs, Jarkko

You want to play the political game? Fine:

We had all the just cause in the world to go into Afghan, and NONE of us wanted to go into Iraq.

Infact, the ONLY European country who 'upholded' their NATO agreement was Britain!

How do you like THAT for upholding laws and rules...
post #23 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neotyguy40 View Post

You want to play the political game? Fine:

We had all the just cause in the world to go into Afghan, and NONE of us wanted to go into Iraq.

Infact, the ONLY European country who 'upholded' their NATO agreement was Britain!

How do you like THAT for upholding laws and rules...

Calm down. I was trying to point out the ridiculousness of the original poster's comment by taking an exaggeratedly one sided view.

Take a look at how many different nations actually operate in Afganistan (Finns included and we're not even part of NATO) to support your just cause. Iraq was different. Who said that NATO membership means that if one NATO member attacks another country without just cause, everyone should join? It's after all a defence pact, not an offence pact. And some of you must have wanted to go to Iraq on false pretenses since you did actually go there. As to why Britaid joined? It really has nothing to do with NATO, more with hoping for political favours in the long run.

Regs, Jarkko
post #24 of 46
NK cables...

...didn't they have to provide cabling to the Russians as part of the AXIS war reparations?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfl6Lu3xQW0

Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen View Post

Nah. You got it all wrong. It's all about the tires (now Nokian tyres) and the cables (NK cables). You see after a long period of using the cables for morse coded messaging when the weather was so bad that not even Nokia tyres could transport you, they thought of something better as they didn't want to make cables or tyres anymore. They wanted instead to stay at home so that you didn't have to see anyone anymore (cables have to be maintained and you might actually see a scary human being). But you still have to communicatite to order milk and presto the wireless communication device was created!

So you see, nothing to do with the TVs, computers and military communication systems. It's all a derivative of their car tyre and cable businesses.

Regs, Jarkko (a Finn)

P.S. No-one here is qualified to go through and interpret the thousands of pages of technical documents that will no doubt make up this case, so may as well have a bit of fun...

...it must be my convict streak.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #25 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

NK cables...

...didn't they have to provide cabling to the Russians as part of the AXIS war reparations?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfl6Lu3xQW0

Sure they did. And they've been supplying the cabling for the communist underground listening stations. The rubber boots were made for the communist armies as well. Naturally you know we were a key member in the Communist block and Nokia was the supplier for rubber and communications for the whole block's military installations.

Regs, Jarkko
post #26 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen View Post

Thanks. When we (the Europeans) do something to uphold the law and rules we've both agreed to (dunno, patents for example?), we're jerks, but when you go and do something similar (let alone invade other countries without just cause), that's OK. So we're jerks. Good that that's clear now. Easier to proceed (no need to be courteous anymore I guess).

Regs, Jarkko

Yes. EU vs Microsoft. EU vs Apple. EU vs Oracle/Sun. EU vs Boeing/McDonnell Douglas (waaaay back in 94) and EU vs Boeing in 2004. Delays, fines, and general harassment of major US tech companies in the interest of EU companies like Airbus. Fortunately the WTO has ruled for US/Boeing and against EU/Airbus last September but that saga will lasts for several more years.

Whether or not the US had just cause for wars belongs in Apple Outsider.
post #27 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

But it is ok when both companies are American, like when Broadcom took on Qualcomm?

No and the US Appeals Court threw out ITCs ban because you can't extend a limited ban to anyone outside the named parties (i.e. you can't ban products that use chips from qualcomm...you can only ban qualcomm chips).

The ITC was the wrong venue for Broadcom. Likewise the ITC is the wrong venue for Nokia.
post #28 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen View Post

Calm down. I was trying to point out the ridiculousness of the original poster's comment by taking an exaggeratedly one sided view.

Sure, it's one sided. Just like all trade disputes are one sided in favor of your own country. However, the EU plays more legal games than the US using the courts to help EU companies compete and protect EU markets and it's frigging annoying.

I can only assume when we are a declining power that we'll resort to doing the same asinine things to China if they begin to out innovate us just like the EU.

Nokia never should have put their patents into the pool if they are going to whine like little babies when a competitor starts beating the crap out of them. If they are asking for the same RAND royalties as they might for any other phone maker fine...but if they did I'd guess that Apple would simply have paid.

Apple won't cross license their own patents just because Nokia wants them and hasn't demanded from other phone makers.

In Apple's complaint:

"Article 81. In Particular, in or about the spring of 2008, Nokia demanded that, as part of it’s compensation for licensing Nokia’s portfolio of purported essential patents, Apple must grant Nokia a license to a particular number of Apple non-standards-essential patents"

"Article 82. In or about May 2009, Nokia demanded a royalty approximately three times as much as the royalty proposed the prior spring, which was itself in excess of a F/RAND rate, as well as “picks’ to Apple’s non-standards-essential patents."

There's no way in hell Apple should have agreed but if Nokia wants to sue them for damages that's fine. Asking for a ITC ban on all Apple products in the US is just asinine and I hope it completely backfires. Joka toiselle kuoppaa kaivaa, se itse siihen lankeaa.

Frankly, I expected better from Finns.
post #29 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Sure, it's one sided. Just like all trade disputes are one sided in favor of your own country. However, the EU plays more legal games than the US using the courts to help EU companies compete and protect EU markets and it's frigging annoying.

While the US government just pays illegal subsidies to their companies (such as your diary farmers) to enable them to compete, and it's frigging annoying...

But that's ok, it is America doing it...
post #30 of 46
Yawn. Proforma stuff. No news here. The ITC is bound to review (just they were the other way around re. Nokia's claims against Apple)..
post #31 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

While the US government just pays illegal subsidies to their companies (such as your diary farmers) to enable them to compete, and it's frigging annoying...

But that's ok, it is America doing it...

Since when is given a one time payment to dairy farmersas part of the stimulus illegal?

The price for milk dropped from $16.80 per cwt to $12.23 per cwt so the dairy farmers were getting hammered because of lower demand. Subsidies aren't to help farmers compete as much stay alive.

Lets see, the EU gave $420M to their dairy famers (280M Euros) because those guys block traffic in the streets and burn tires but our $290M subsidies are illegal?

US, NZ and Australian dairy farmers took it on the chin from Europe and you blame the US? The US move was in RESPONSE to the EU move. Both of which are allowed under WTO rules so neither is "illegal".

Plus Obama signed a memo eliminating tarrif on Isreali dairy products and US imports of dairy products have gone from $800M to $3B...and we're turning hundreds of thousands of milk cows into hamburgers. WTF has the EU done for your dairy guys? But nooo...the US is the bad guy. You clearly have no biases there...
post #32 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Since when is given a one time payment to dairy farmersas part of the stimulus illegal?

When trade agreements say it is. And if there is no issue with them, why did the US complain so much (and went to the WTO about it) when Canada paid their dairy farmers subsidies?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

The price for milk dropped from $16.80 per cwt to $12.23 per cwt so the dairy farmers were getting hammered because of lower demand. Subsidies aren't to help farmers compete as much stay alive.

No, the US and EU provided subsidies as both the US and the EU could not produce milk as cheap as other countries.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Lets see, the EU gave $420M to their dairy famers (280M Euros) because those guys block traffic in the streets and burn tires but our $290M subsidies are illegal?

I think you will find it is the French that block the traffic etc, and while they are part of, they are not "the EU"

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

US, NZ and Australian dairy farmers took it on the chin from Europe and you blame the US? The US move was in RESPONSE to the EU move. Both of which are allowed under WTO rules so neither is "illegal".

No they did, the US responsed by providing subsidies of their own, and NZ have protested to both governments about them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Plus Obama signed a memo eliminating tarrif on Isreali dairy products and US imports of dairy products have gone from $800M to $3B...and we're turning hundreds of thousands of milk cows into hamburgers. WTF has the EU done for your dairy guys? But nooo...the US is the bad guy. You clearly have no biases there...

What are you on about? I see it is acceptable for you to hassle another nation, but the second someone questions yours everyone is mean to you? I think we see the bias right there...
post #33 of 46
It's actually quite telling that you elected to ignore that you committed the same transgression you had the gall to call another party out for.

It is not okay for you to point out to another party what you FEEL they have done by doing it yourself.

That is the definition of hypocrisy, and makes anything you stated before or after it null and void. Essentially non-existent.

Meaning all anyone will remember is the insult you threw.

Nice job keeping that higher ground....


Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

The minute you mention one race, and ignore the other it becomes one.



You might want to check you history a bit, you never sent any possums over to NZ, the governor of the countries at the time (who was from the UK) thought it was a good idea to bring some over. And yes we kill tonnes of them, it is a national passtime did you not know?
post #34 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by harleighquinn View Post

It's actually quite telling that you elected to ignore that you committed the same transgression you had the gall to call another party out for.

And what did the bit you quoted have to do with that little speech?
post #35 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

When trade agreements say it is.

If it were against WTO rules, neither the US or the EU could have done so without severe repercussions.

Quote:
No, the US and EU provided subsidies as both the US and the EU could not produce milk as cheap as other countries.

US farmers are well able to compete when the EU isn't subsidizing their dairy farmers. In fact that had been a sticking point between the US and EU for a while.

Quote:
I think you will find it is the French that block the traffic etc, and while they are part of, they are not "the EU"

False.

"Over 2500 farmers from across the EU blockaded the area outside the European Union's headquarters, burning tires and hay outside an emergency meeting of farm ministers"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ows-udder.html

"Following weeks of protests by dairy farmers across the EU, the European Agriculture Commissioner proposed on Monday injecting €280 million into the troubled European dairy sector."

http://ictsd.org/i/news/bridgesweekly/57418/

Gee I thought it was us dumb americans that didn't know what country Brussels is in. Hint: It's not France.

Quote:
No they did, the US responsed by providing subsidies of their own, and NZ have protested to both governments about them.

So the EU enacted subsidies harming US farmers and the US had no choice but to respond. How is this the fault of the US and not the EU?

Quote:
What are you on about? I see it is acceptable for you to hassle another nation, but the second someone questions yours everyone is mean to you? I think we see the bias right there...

I'm on about you blaming the US for something the EU instigated by enacting subsidies FIRST after everyone told them that if they did so other countries would likely respond in kind. Which the US did.

And some folks (even in NZ) blame overproduction in NZ for falling dairy prices leading to those EU subsidies.

"the New Zealand dairy industry, led by Fonterra, may have to bear its share of the blame...export subsidies were all but unavoidable due to the astonishing fall in dairy prices, caused by lowered demand worldwide and overproduction from New Zealand – Fonterra, responsible for 94% of our production, controls nearly 40% of global trade.
...
the co-operative’s former managing director of global trade, John Shaskey, believes Fonterra’s lax sales attitude has flooded the market with product"

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/kiwi-da...s-coming-39872

Ooops.

Please at least pick an example that you are not clueless about.
post #36 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

If it were against WTO rules, neither the US or the EU could have done so without severe repercussions.

I didn't say WTO in that bit, I said trade agreements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

US farmers are well able to compete when the EU isn't subsidizing their dairy farmers. In fact that had been a sticking point between the US and EU for a while.

So it is the EUs fault you can't compete against countries not subsidising?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

False.

Honest mistake, it is always the french doing that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

So the EU enacted subsidies harming US farmers and the US had no choice but to respond. How is this the fault of the US and not the EU?

No, they didn't have to response, I am not blaming either side, I am just commenting on how people were being so one sided with their responses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

I'm on about you blaming the US for something the EU instigated by enacting subsidies FIRST after everyone told them that if they did so other countries would likely respond in kind. Which the US did.

Like I said, just because someone does something, that doesn't mean you have to do it as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

And some folks (even in NZ) blame overproduction in NZ for falling dairy prices leading to those EU subsidies.

It might have been, I don't really care about the cause, but in both cases the results is still the same, the US and EU governments are artificially making a local business sustainable when it is not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Please at least pick an example that you are not clueless about.

That's right, because you are a freeking genius about everything.
post #37 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

I didn't say WTO in that bit, I said trade agreements.

Name them if you're so sure. Thus far you've been wrong on every point.

Quote:
So it is the EUs fault you can't compete against countries not subsidising?

It IS the EU's fault that we cannot compete against THIER subsidized dairy farmers, yes.

Quote:
No, they didn't have to response, I am not blaming either side, I am just commenting on how people were being so one sided with their responses.

Yes, we did if we didn't want US dairy farmers to go broke competing against subsidized EU farmers and NZ farmers trashing the dairy market for short term gain.

Quote:
Like I said, just because someone does something, that doesn't mean you have to do it as well.

Yes, we could just leave our citizens hanging and let the EU farmers get all the sales.

Quote:
It might have been, I don't really care about the cause, but in both cases the results is still the same, the US and EU governments are artificially making a local business sustainable when it is not.

Arguably because your dairy farmers help trash the market through overproduction making our local businesses unsustainable in the first place. But then, you don't care about the cause, just that YOUR farmers are hurt.

Golly gosh gee batman, that seems awfully one sided to me and the same attitude you're whining about. I would have thought that was irony except you're not being ironic...just oblivious.

Quote:
That's right, because you are a freeking genius about everything.

At least I didn't bring up a point that was completely stupid where you whine that the EU and then US are subsidizing their dairy farmers to the detriment of local NZ dairy farmers AFTER NZ farmers trashed the dairy market by over producing causing the EU to start the chain reaction. At least we're eating our cows to try to rectify the problem so subsidies can end when prices recover. What has NZ done?

Get real. There are plenty of things the US does that's mean or just plain ol' stupid. Every country does because we're all human.

This wasn't one of them but I'm not going to find them for you so you can bash us.
post #38 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Name them if you're so sure. Thus far you've been wrong on every point.

No I haven't, that is your belief, which is wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

It IS the EU's fault that we cannot compete against THIER subsidized dairy farmers, yes.

The world is much bigger than just the EU.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Yes, we did if we didn't want US dairy farmers to go broke competing against subsidized EU farmers and NZ farmers trashing the dairy market for short term gain.

All you are doing is pumping the tax payers money down the drain. If keeping a unsubstainable industry alive is so important, why isn't the US subsiding manufacturing industries to stop businesses moving to China?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Arguably because your dairy farmers help trash the market through overproduction making our local businesses unsustainable in the first place. But then, you don't care about the cause, just that YOUR farmers are hurt.

My dairy farmers?? What do you mean my dairy farmers, when have I mentioned who "my" people are, yes you know what country I live in, I am never said which country I am from though.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Golly gosh gee batman, that seems awfully one sided to me and the same attitude you're whining about. I would have thought that was irony except you're not being ironic...just oblivious.

Getting back to the original comment I brought up, why did the user mention things about one party in the original article, but ignored the two other companies that happen to be American, that is the question, one they still haven't answered.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

At least I didn't bring up a point that was completely stupid where you whine that the EU and then US are subsidizing their dairy farmers to the detriment of local NZ dairy farmers AFTER NZ farmers trashed the dairy market by over producing causing the EU to start the chain reaction. At least we're eating our cows to try to rectify the problem so subsidies can end when prices recover. What has NZ done?

No, you were the one that said the EU was so mean to the American companies. Do you also bash the Chinese and Indians etc for selling labour so cheaply that businesses has left the US for these other countries? As for what NZ has done, I think they have done very well at producing a product cheaper than their competitors and still being able to get full market rates from it, without the need for subsidies. They also grow cows for meat in NZ, they taste quite nice.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

This wasn't one of them but I'm not going to find them for you so you can bash us.

I haven't bashed you, I asked a question, very different, you might be getting a little bit emotive if you think otherwise.
post #39 of 46
Somehow saying nokia is a finn comp is a racial crime.

NOKIA and FINLAND both promote each other every chance they get .So excuse us if we state the ...

peace

9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen View Post

Calm down. I was trying to point out the ridiculousness of the original poster's comment by taking an exaggeratedly one sided view.

Take a look at how many different nations actually operate in Afganistan (Finns included and we're not even part of NATO) to support your just cause. Iraq was different. Who said that NATO membership means that if one NATO member attacks another country without just cause, everyone should join? It's after all a defence pact, not an offence pact. And some of you must have wanted to go to Iraq on false pretenses since you did actually go there. As to why Britaid joined? It really has nothing to do with NATO, more with hoping for political favours in the long run.

Regs, Jarkko

Our cause ??

You finns love to sit under the safe skirt of the USA and bitch . Your jokes are stupid.
American boys are dead keeping you safe .Try a little respect fool .
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › ITC to review Apple's patent infringement claims against Nokia