Microsoft, Intel, Oracle & AT&T come to Apple's defense in looming iPhone 4 ban
High stakes in an impending iPhone 4 ban by the International Trade Commission have created some unlikely bedfellows, with a trade group representing Microsoft coming to the defense of rival Apple.
Microsoft is part of BSA, which also represents Oracle and Intel. The group has argued that the use of standard-essential patents to ban products should not be allowed, except under unusual circumstances, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.
Those companies are also joined by AT&T, which was cited in Apple's legal papers as saying that the ITC's ban, set to go into effect Aug. 4, is "inconsistent with the president's goal of ubiquitous broadband deployment."
Verizon also appealed to President Barack Obama in an open letter last week, asking the administration to intervene in Apple v. Samsung and prevent the looming ban. Verizon's support comes in spite of the fact that the ban will only affect the iPhone 4 variant that runs on AT&T and T-Mobile networks.
The president has not intervened in an ITC ban since 1987, but the ruling against Apple has a number of officials calling for something to be done. Monday's report cited people familiar with the matter saying that antitrust officials from the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission are also weighing in on the ruling.
U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman is also "conducting a careful and balanced review process of the ITC decision," the agency said in a statement.
Apple believes that Samsung shouldn't be able to block iPhone or iPad sales because the company isn't licensing its standard essential patents under fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, or FRAND. The iPhone maker has argued that a product ban could give Samsung the clout to extract high patent royalties from rival companies.
The ITC ruled in June that the AT&T versions of Apple's iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS and iPhone 3G all infringe on patents owned by Samsung, and that the devices must be banned from sale by early August. Apple has filed a stay in opposition, arguing the ban would "sweep away an entire segment of Apple's product offerings" and negatively impact its carrier partners.
Microsoft is part of BSA, which also represents Oracle and Intel. The group has argued that the use of standard-essential patents to ban products should not be allowed, except under unusual circumstances, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.
Those companies are also joined by AT&T, which was cited in Apple's legal papers as saying that the ITC's ban, set to go into effect Aug. 4, is "inconsistent with the president's goal of ubiquitous broadband deployment."
Verizon also appealed to President Barack Obama in an open letter last week, asking the administration to intervene in Apple v. Samsung and prevent the looming ban. Verizon's support comes in spite of the fact that the ban will only affect the iPhone 4 variant that runs on AT&T and T-Mobile networks.
The president has not intervened in an ITC ban since 1987, but the ruling against Apple has a number of officials calling for something to be done. Monday's report cited people familiar with the matter saying that antitrust officials from the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission are also weighing in on the ruling.
U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman is also "conducting a careful and balanced review process of the ITC decision," the agency said in a statement.
Apple believes that Samsung shouldn't be able to block iPhone or iPad sales because the company isn't licensing its standard essential patents under fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, or FRAND. The iPhone maker has argued that a product ban could give Samsung the clout to extract high patent royalties from rival companies.
The ITC ruled in June that the AT&T versions of Apple's iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS and iPhone 3G all infringe on patents owned by Samsung, and that the devices must be banned from sale by early August. Apple has filed a stay in opposition, arguing the ban would "sweep away an entire segment of Apple's product offerings" and negatively impact its carrier partners.
Comments
lol
Easy to fix the whole mess. When something is licensed under FRAND, it should be decided up front the royalty fee and trigger point where the royalty is due. No more arguing after that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by techno
the root of all evil is found in lawyers!
How?
That ban would make a horrible example indeed. That thing needs to be block.
That being said, I hope that Apple will paid its FRAND to Samsung at some point, The amount should be set by a third party imo.
It's 2 generations behind, and quite frankly it wouldn't matter.
5S is almost out in a few months, by when iphone 4 would have been history.
People need to remove their hypocritical glasses and start asking themselves why its suddenly cool to support a S. Korean company over one right here in the US that is only trying to make sure people don't blatantly copy their products.
I realize product is made overseas, but all the real work is done here in the US. People in this country should be supporting Apple whether they buy the product or not. I don't see a lot of people from other countries hating on Apple like our own. Sad.
A lawyer i worked with told me this - "its in the best interest of the law firm to tell the client how a case may end up - but if a client has principals then they have to PAY for those principals!"
and with Verizon, att and microsoft etc, that brings a WHOLE new meaning to "the enemy of my enemy is my friend!" ?!?
That judge should be put to trial and be banned for life. He is an idiot.
When judges ban Samsung products they are geniuses who know the law. When they ban Apple products they are idiots?Care to tell us what the actual legal error was in his ruling.
Another Great Example NO FRIENDS, NO ENEMIES, JUST INTERESTS.
And since an Cheaper iPhone coming out, like what other have said i dont think Apple would be bothered at all.
Of course it matters. Age has nothing to do with it. If a ruling is totally wrong, it's totally wrong.
And, completely separate from the primary issue at hand, if Apple decides it's "okay" that an old model is banned and nothing else, then Samsung gets away with having their old, useless models banned and nothing else, too.
EDIT: Why the heck does everyone seem okay with this? "They're not selling it anymore, therefore it's fine" is the opposite of what we should be saying.
All is fair in business. Apple won't be selling the iPhone 4 after September's iPhone refresh anyway.
I see it as clearing away the JUNK or Substandard phones.lol
APPLE SUCKS..........
Android beats apple in every way.
Apple has limited hardware and apple drones to dumb to demand more for there money.
If apple had a clue they would adapt to the new phone/tablet world.
Apple will die out like microsoft phones did.
apple = outdated hardware limited choices.
Android = the future of tech.
Why you useless, pathetic imbeciles have nothing better to do than be complete tossers on Apple websites will ever elude me.
But knowing that you're so unimaginably stupid and insecure about your own product decisions, an aspect of your lives that is meaningless in the grand scheme of things, that you have to get your kicks doing this makes me feel a heck of a lot better about myself. Doesn't do it all the way, but every little bit helps.
So thanks, morons. Thanks for showing me how much better I am than a fair portion of the human race.
Quote:
Apple has filed a stay in opposition, arguing the ban would "sweep away an entire segment of Apple's product offerings" and negatively impact its carrier partners.
I see it as clearing away the JUNK or Substandard phones.lol
APPLE SUCKS..........
Android beats apple in every way.
Apple has limited hardware and apple drones to dumb to demand more for there money.
If apple had a clue they would adapt to the new phone/tablet world.
Apple will die out like microsoft phones did.
apple = outdated hardware limited choices.
Android = the future of tech.
Yes, APPLE IS DOOMED!!!
2 posts in 3 years? srsly??
Whose government is this!?