President Obama vetoes Samsung ban on Apple, Inc. iPhones, iPads

13468914

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 280


    How much is Samesung paying you?

  • Reply 102 of 280
    justbobfjustbobf Posts: 261member
    What would the comments be like here if it were the Korean government overturning a ban on Samsung products?

    Oh, please! Don't mob me-- just give it a rest.
  • Reply 103 of 280
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    justbobf wrote: »
    What would the comments be like here if it were the Korean government overturning a ban on Samsung products?

    Oh, please! Don't mob me-- just give it a rest.

    It will depend on the case. No one can give a reasonable answer to your question without knowing the specifics.
  • Reply 104 of 280
    Dan_DilgerDan_Dilger Posts: 1,583member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post





    Or another tone AI would take would be



    "Grr the President sticking his nose where it doesn't belong. The courts decided and that should be final"



    Or



    "We all know the Obama administration got paid by Google. This is Obama returning the favor. "



    Look at the DOJ case. As soon as Apple lost all of AI was condemning the government, even Apple called its punishment punitive and draconian. The moment something is in Apples favor it's 'the right thing to do' .


     


    A) ITC rulings always enter a presidential review period


    B) ITC is not a court


     


    The rest of your stuff Verges on Samsung-Strategy Analytics propaganda. 

  • Reply 105 of 280
    rayzrayz Posts: 814member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by justbobf View Post



    What would the comments be like here if it were the Korean government overturning a ban on Samsung products?



    Oh, please! Don't mob me-- just give it a rest.


     


    Samsung is pretty much immune to Korean law


     


    http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/29/samsungs-former-chairman-pardoned-again/


     


    So it's unlikely that such a ban would ever be on the table in the first place.

  • Reply 106 of 280
    rayzrayz Posts: 814member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post





    In the olden days we would say:



    "He crept in. crapped, and crept out!"



    or for our UK friends:



    "He popped in, pooped, and popped out!"



    or for the Germanic languages:



    "Essen und Scheißen!"


     


    I think it's called a 'Drive-by trolling'

  • Reply 107 of 280
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    justbobf wrote: »
    What would the comments be like here if it were the Korean government overturning a ban on Samsung products?

    Oh, please! Don't mob me-- just give it a rest.

    It's about time.

    I've been waiting for some fool to play the racist card.

    What took you so long?

    Running on Korean Standard Time?

    ;)
  • Reply 108 of 280
    customtbcustomtb Posts: 345member
    frood wrote: »
    From what I see, as long as the courts refuse to define 'Fair and Reasonable' its a big lawyer fest.  If Samsung owns the SEP patent it thinks a high price is 'fair and reasonable.'  Apple doesn't think that's fair at all and proposes its own low price as 'fair and reasonable.'  Samsung of course does not agree with that.  Vice versa if its Apple that owns the SEP patent

    Neither side budges.

    Who is right?

    It depends on what your definition of 'fair and reasonable' is

    Apparantly the ITC reacts much quicker than the courts, but it is not actually a court- it cant impose any penalties other than either banning, or not banning.

    It strikes me a little bit like a court where the only option the judge has is to listen to both sides for 10 minutes and then either shoot someone or not shoot them.  So if someone commits a minor crime, or even a medium one, is the punishment too severe for the crime?

    It sounds to me like there was a lot of merit in overturning this one.  Did Apple skimp out on Samsung and not negotiate in full faith?  Probably a little bit, they tend to know what they can get away with :)  But does the punishment of banning them fit the crime?  A lot of prior rulings seem to indicate that it did not and was excessive on the ITC's part.

    In that sense it is a good overturn.  If the general sentiment is true that it can start a 'tit for tat' war between nations and the ITC as well as generally promoting the notion that SEP patents are worth less than non SEP patents there's a danger there as there will be little incentive to pursue SEP

    Of course there will be incentive to pursue SEP. Getting a small piece of everyone's pie can result in big pay days and a great revenue steam. Consider that without promoting their tech under sep, it wouldn't be used by anyone. To then turn around after agreeing to Sep and try to extort high prices is ridiculous. I hope Samsung and google keep it up. SEP standard setters will start bypassing their techs completely.
  • Reply 109 of 280
    customtbcustomtb Posts: 345member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    Google hasn't ever asserted any SEP's and so hasn't been "slapped" for seeking a ban with or charging exorbitant fees for them. You're confusing them with their independently operated subsidiary Motorola Mobility. IIRC these cases started before Motorola had even spun off MM. and long before Google got involved. It's just like saying Apple is in the midst of layoffs when it's really their independent subsidiary Filemaker who decided it had to let some folks go to stay in business.

    Of course there's those that will continue to mix and match Google and Motorola as tho they're one and the same. It's a favorite tactic of FOSSPatents so the confusion by some here might be understandable.

    I don't think it is as much confusion as it is reading between the lines. If I own a company 100% and decide to fire people I am for all practical purposes firing people even though "it's the company doing the firing". Not legally, but for all practical purposes, Apple is totally responsible for the layoffs at the independent company as Apple determines whether they act independently. Likewise, for practical purposes, not legal, giggle is responsible for anything motorola does or has done since purchasing them. The fact they are independent because giggle wants it that way or that it started pre giggle is irrelevant.
  • Reply 110 of 280
    gatorguy wrote: »
    Google hasn't ever asserted any SEP's and so hasn't been "slapped" for seeking a ban with or charging exorbitant fees for them. You're confusing them with their independently operated subsidiary Motorola Mobility. IIRC these cases started before Motorola had even spun off MM. and long before Google got involved. It's just like saying Apple is in the midst of layoffs when it's really their independent subsidiary Filemaker who decided it had to let some folks go to stay in business.

    Of course there's those that will continue to mix and match Google and Motorola as tho they're one and the same. It's a favorite tactic of FOSSPatents so the confusion by some here might be understandable.

    I am not confused at all. I believe I am seeing the Google/Motorola group clearly.

    Once Google purchased Motorola, Motorola had to get Google's permission to continue pursuing SEP bans and/or charging exhorbitant fees on competitor products. Google did not withhold its permission. At that moment, Google became THE company pursuing these very bad deals.

    Sure, many people will try to keep Google out of the SEP mess, but they cannot. Google chose to spend $12.5 billion to purchase Motorola and knew exactly what was going on.

    Losses cannot be attributed to Motorola while wins are attributed to Google. All goes to Google
  • Reply 111 of 280


    Using FRAND patents against the competitors is dishonorableness. Obama's rejection is neither good or bad. It is fair in terms of the valid rules of the patent system.

  • Reply 112 of 280
    herbapouherbapou Posts: 2,227member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rayz View Post


     


    I think it's called a 'Drive-by trolling'



     


    Due to the political nature of this news, there are restrictions on other Apple sites regarding comments. So some trolls came here.

  • Reply 113 of 280
    tsun zutsun zu Posts: 72member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by superdx View Post


     


    Thanks for this clear explanation. Been on The Verge, Engadget, Slashdot, Ars Technica and everyone seems bent on bashing Obama rather than digging through what the legal details of what happened.



     


    You wanted a fair, reasable, unbiased review on an Apple related news from Engadget?


     


    Verge and ARS Technica is better but lately they are also re-printing press releases from stupids like Strategy ANALytics without checking facts. Fact checking or thinking or original report is a thing of past. Except for AI and a handful of sites.

  • Reply 114 of 280
    dnd0psdnd0ps Posts: 253member




    Or another tone AI would take would be



    "Grr the President sticking his nose where it doesn't belong. The courts decided and that should be final"



    Or



    "We all know the Obama administration got paid by Google. This is Obama returning the favor. "



    Look at the DOJ case. As soon as Apple lost all of AI was condemning the government, even Apple called its punishment punitive and draconian. The moment something is in Apples favor it's 'the right thing to do' .

     



    Last time I checked this is AppleInsider, wrong site matey

  • Reply 115 of 280
    All I have to say is: Yes! In your face! Well done!
  • Reply 116 of 280
    froodfrood Posts: 771member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by leavingthebigG View Post





    IF Samsung is as innovative as it claims to be then it should be willing to spend its money and time designing and developing its own non-SEP technology that is so compelling that it makes Apple want to copy it.


     


    That's the danger of making SEP patents worthless.  One possible outcome is both Samsung and Google are working on wireless technologies for the next generation of phones that are several hundred times faster than LTE.  With no incentive or advantage to license under SEP, they'll simply keep it proprietary.


     


    Apple users would be stuck with 'dial-up' speed phones relative to the zippy Google and Samsung phones.  That may not be an entirely bad thing as it would prompt Apple to develop its own wireless technologies and now compete to come up with an even faster or better Apple proprietary wireless solution (Apple is historically very bad at coming up with these type of techs though).  With the small market share in some countries outside the US it would likely not be worth the cost of deploying, but in their established markets they could try to gain a competitive edge with it.


     


    My personal view is that while standards generally promote slower 'change' and innovation, they have a very useful purpose.  I like the fact that I can call my friends regardless of if they prefer Apple, Android, Windows, or landline phones.


     


    In a world where there were 50 cell phone competitors, SEPs would actually be essential.  In a world where there are only two, its a very real possibility they could go their own way since both iOS and Android have enough users to be a 'standard' in and of themselves.

  • Reply 117 of 280
    customtbcustomtb Posts: 345member
    frood wrote: »
    That's the danger of making SEP patents worthless.  One possible outcome is both Samsung and Google are working on wireless technologies for the next generation of phones that are several hundred times faster than LTE.  With no incentive or advantage to license under SEP, they'll simply keep it proprietary.

    Apple users would be stuck with 'dial-up' speed phones relative to the zippy Google and Samsung phones.  That may not be an entirely bad thing as it would prompt Apple to develop its own wireless technologies and now compete to come up with an even faster or better Apple proprietary wireless solution (Apple is historically very bad at coming up with these type of techs though).  With the small market share in some countries outside the US it would likely not be worth the cost of deploying, but in their established markets they could try to gain a competitive edge with it.

    My personal view is that while standards generally promote slower 'change' and innovation, they have a very useful purpose.  I like the fact that I can call my friends regardless of if they prefer Apple, Android, Windows, or landline phones.

    In a world where there were 50 cell phone competitors, SEPs would actually be essential.  In a world where there are only two, its a very real possibility they could go their own way since both iOS and Android have enough users to be a 'standard' in and of themselves.

    Not likely any carrier would invest in tech that only worked with one carriers phone
  • Reply 118 of 280
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,471member
    drblank wrote: »
    hahahahahahahahahahaha............

    Yet they so often derail a thread because so may answer them. Personally I think the mods should be more aggressive in removing them.
  • Reply 119 of 280
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,471member
    herbapou wrote: »
    Due to the political nature of this news, there are restrictions on other Apple sites regarding comments. So some trolls came here.

    Exactly! … And that tells us something. Come on mods, remove political posts immediately. Of course by definition this post has a political connection and no doubt makes it harder to separate a sensible post from a hysterical, biased rant.
  • Reply 120 of 280

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Stevel View Post



    what a shameful act of injustice. If you can't beat them with innovation in the market place, and if you can't beat them with litigation in the courtroom, then go running to your President for the hope you paid him enough to do the deed. What about the price fixing Apple? You think Obama will help you out with that as well? Pathetic. Guaranteed to have some backlash with markets outside of the US.




    Yet another Sameshit loving Fandroid... image


     


    hint: Go to macrumors! That site seems to be crawling with fandroids...

Sign In or Register to comment.