bells

SpamSandwich said:

A little surprised they took this long to come around to the right conclusion since they are so concerned about the bottom dollar.

Not me. It likely took IBM’s support to make the case. Walmart relies on IBM infrastructure, and IBM support probably made Walmart see the wisdom of the move. 

These cases are not similar at all and the assertion that they are shows a lack of understanding concerning anti-trust Law.  


Anti-trust is about protecting the consumer by ensuring fair competition. Europe’s rules and the US rules differ, but the principles are the same.  They tend on focusing on preventing monopolists from abusing their power to enter new markets or squeezing out competition.

In Europe Google has a monopoly when it comes to search and it’s phone operating system. Third party phone makers  have no realistic choice, but to use Android. Google is using this dominance to ensure its other services like email, search, and itsbrowser stay entrenched by forcing hardware manufacturers to bundle these services or else not get a license to use Android.

microsoft did the same thing with Windows. Pc makers would get very unfavorable licensing terms or no license at all  if they didn’t bundle and make Explorer the default. It put the then dominant Netscape out of business. 

Apple got a raw deal with e-books. Apple had no market power to force publishers to do anything. The system Amazon favored allowed it to set the prices of ebooks thereby often selling the ebooks at a loss to publishers. Further, Amazon has the monopoly in online book sales and was using that monopoly to force publishers to give favorable terms for ebooks. The government screwed that one up. That is why Apple felt confident it would win at trial.

with the App Store Apple doesn’t have a monopoly for phone hardware sales. If you don’t like the App Store buy a phone made by somebody else.

allmypeople said:

Trump has MAJOR issues.

But SO does Clinton... Arguably worse in many areas. I read Clinton Cash (well reviewed in the left & right press) and it is horrifying. There's lots of smart members on this board. Read the book or google some of the articles about it.

Bottom line: I don't think it's a good idea for Apple to take sides.

Many people probably forgot or don't remember - Jobs was friends with the Clintons. They stayed at his house when they visited their daughter when she attended Stanford.

Further, Jobs put  Al Gore on Apple's board, where he still remains.

sflocal said:

SpamSandwich said:

huckdaisy1 said:

Time to vote Al off the island.  

He's done little for Apple as far as keeping them ahead of political trends.

Hey.... if it weren't for Al, we wouldn't have the Internet... and no Apple. /s

Seriously, imho Al has been a dead weight on the board.  Does anyone have any info on what Gore has done in the past decade?

I'd be more interested in what you did in the last decade. I at least know who Al Gore is. Steve Jobs also personally picked Al Gore for Apple's board. I wonder why he didn't call you?

racoleman29 said:

Democrat here. She'd never get my vote...Apple hater.

I’m a democrat as well and she would get my vote if she was the nominee but not at the primary. Her view makes more sense for companies like ATT and Comcast not Apple. It is wacky one company can be both an internet service provider and own the content. In many areas ATT and Comcast are abusive monopolies. 

Apple is not a monopoly and it build the App Store concept from the ground up. I don’t always like how it polices the store but I could switch to another phone if it mattered that much. 

Google and Facebook and Amazon have different issues. They often use their monopoly status in one area to push a new product in a new area at the expense of fair competition and to the detriment of consumers. 

MlorianFueller said:

applemagic said:

Hmm...I am not sure why AI is presenting this (the incentive payment) as some kind of a bribe that Apple offered Qualcomm. Going by Florian Mueller's article on fosspatents.com, it appears to be the other way around!

That is, Qualcomm had a habit of negotiating incentive payments from device makers in return for strategic favours. So, there's really no wrinkle in the FTC case, as suggested by AI. Instead, it's one of four issues related to Qualcomm's conduct that are being investigated. To quote:

********

For the FTC, Jennifer Milici outlined the four key issues surrounding Qualcomm's conduct that the FTC is tackling (let's not forget that some other aspects are at issue in Apple v. Qualcomm in San Diego, where a trial will start on April 15), which are interrelated as she also explained:

• the "no license-no chips" policy;
• incentive payments (for a brief explanation, those incentives effectively reduce patent licensing fees in exchange for doing Qualcomm some strategically-relevant favors);
• the refusal to license rival chipset makers (note that Judge Koh's summary judgment in this context was based on contractual obligations, while the focus at this trial is now on an antitrust duty to deal); and
• past exclusive arrangements with Apple.

********

http://www.fosspatents.com/2019/01/in-its-courtroom-chess-match-with.html

We all know Florian Mueller is paid by Apple and has been Apple support for so many years. His blog is biased and has no credibility. The fact that FTC is getting testimony from Apple and other manufactures saying Qualcomm is a monopoly shows the flaw in the FTC case. Apple suing because of the price that has been previously agreed upon by Apple and come to know the only reason that both companies agreed to the deal is because Apple demanded a $1 billion "incentive payment" to secure the deal. Apple will and always eat alive their suppliers.

Oh, and btw - https://www.sullcrom.com/district-court-holds-that-frand-commitment-does-not-require-licensing-at-chip-level

You are kidding right? Mueller mostly took Samsung and Nokia's in Apple's fight with those two. Further, Qualcomm's CEO's testimony doesn't even make sense. Apple didn't have any leverage over Qualcomm to demand anything. Who else is the FTC going to get to testify other than the companies that have dealings with Qualcomm?

Additionally, if a robber asks you for the hundred dollars in your pocket, and you agree because he has a gun to your head, that doesn't really mean you agreed in a legally binding manner.

The district court case doesn't mean anything. Texas is a friendly to patent Plaintiff's that is why everybody sues there. The case was contrary to how a California court rules, and the Texas court had to apply French law. It likely will get appealed. 

avon b7 said:

mercel said:

Joe Arredondo said:

At least the Chinesse realize they dont have what is required to create such amazing products and they are trying to learn how to make it... is bad but you have to learn somewere.... Apple need to protect better its investments

And people should stop patronizing the copycat manufacturers.  I’m looking at you Huawei, Samsung, etc.  

At this point in time it should be clear to all that a very widespread and intense slur campaign is underway by the US government against Huawei.

The US is pushing other countries hard to stop Huawei's progress in key strategic fields where the US looks to lose influence.

Pompeo is on tour at this very moment and attacking Huawei at every step - and admitting to it publicly - but with little or nothing in tow in terms of facts.

I would say if there is anything to bite on, companies must present formal charges. 'Anonymous' claims and how they are presented should be taken lightly until the 5G roll out is well under way.

Huawei's R&D outlay has been consistently near the top of the world rankings for years now and that is part of the reality the US hawks do not want to entertain. 

The courts is very much the way to go if any of the facts want to be heard (should they truly exist).

As far as stripping down competitors' products goes, I'm sure it's standard practice and I include Apple in this group too as well.

Gosh you claim there are very little facts to back things up, but you show very little yourself. We do know they tried to steal technology from T-Mobile as well as Akhan. Huawei's phones are iPhone knock offs. According to news reports this week, Huawei tried to gain information about competitors by promising manufactures manufacturing contracts for stealing technology and the same of employees of competitors. 

There is also a difference between buying a competitors products to learn how they work to illegally stealing the underlying IP. I wonder who's phone Apple bought and broke down when it first came up with the iPhone or Apple Watch. 

eye.surgeon said:

So the multinational corporation is worried about elected officials accountable to the people meddling with the constitution. I guess Apple prefers to do the meddling themselves. Certainly they have welcomed their communist Chinese overlords with open arms, censorship and all, without a complaint.

Last I checked, Apple is an American company. It is entitled to its opinions, and allowed to make decisions based on its best interests.

Apple isn’t going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars building a second home if it isn’t happy with the environment. Like any company, it wants the move to be financially beneficial. It also wants employees to want to work at the location. Apple has not publically commented on its views regarding NC’s circus  policitcal environment, but it certainly is entitled to make those views known. 

As far as Apple doing business in China goes, I’m not a fan, but Apple’s view is it can effectuate change from within, and putting up with China’s laws is worth the access to the market and manufacturing. Maybe it’s right. Maybe it’s made a mistake. Nonetheless it would be very expensive for Apple to just move from China after the tremendous investments it’s made in the country. Perhaps that is why Apple is proceeding cautiously in NC. It doesn’t want to make an enormous investment that it can’t easily back out of. You have already seen Apple slowly attempt to reduce its reliance on China for manufacturing by assisting its manufacturing partners to open new facilities in other countries.

Elected Officials might be accountable to the people, but Politicians, mostly Republicans, have fought to stack the deck in their favor by redrawing districts to dilute their opponents votes. Further, schools have been stripped of funding, so many people truly aren’t educated enough to understand what they are voting for. We allow the rich to spend billions of dollars to influence elections. Our source of news is owned by the same rich people. The whole trying to rewrite the constitution in NC to undermine a law fully elected governor is just another example that voters really don’t have much power. The people vote for something, the politicians try to undermine that. 

GeorgeBMac said:

He is quite right to shame Apple.   They should be ashamed.

Their blocking the use of bluetooth for necessary apps will cost tens of thousands of lives. 

Trump already has the blood of almost 70,000 on his hands.  Does Tim want the blood of that much and more on his hands?    When your mother, father, wife or child is dying this ideological argument for "privacy" tends to lose its appeal.

Was it too difficult to read the whole article? Did you miss the part where Apple and Google created an API that France could have elected to use that would accomplish the same goal more effectively without compromising security?

So it isn't an either or situation. No doubt France has been far more effective in addressing Covid-19 then the US, but in this instance France is blinded by its hate of American companies. I also find it ironic that France hit Apple with a big penalty for updating IOS in a way that effected performance for older iPhone, but here it wants Apple to adopt a solution that will kill battery life. The hypocrisy is amplified by the fact that Apple has given France a solution. 

Apple also has to worry about what it is willing to do for one Country it will have to be willing to do for all. This access can be abused and Apple will have a hard time putting the cat back in the bag once released. 

mjtomlin said:

georgie01 said:

seanismorris said:

My amateur projections saying the number of infected will quadruple over the next 2 week (in the USA)...

I really hope I’m wrong.

You may be right and of course that would be very bad, but we as a country desperately need perspective. As of now, if the coronavirus deaths quadruple they will still be less than projected deaths for the flu. It also very likely that the death rate is strongly skewed toward a higher death rate since those who are suffering are mainly the ones being tested.

I only say these things because our panic and overreactions to the coronavirus is causing more problems than the virus itself. We need to take it seriously, but we need to have perspective and patience.

Point 1. Anyone who suspects they may have is being tested, not just “those who are suffering”.

Point 2. You cant base “overreacting” to what the numbers show NOW. This isn’t about NOW, its about preparing for what might come, if you dont do anything NOW. This ignorance is EXACTLY why the US has sharply risen in the passed week - no one took it seriously when they SHOULD have - long before it became a problem. With an epidemic you have to fix it before it begins, otherwise its too late.

Point 3. “If the deaths quadruple” ... We havent even started with the body counts yet. The US is going to surge and surpass all other countries combined due to the lack of national leadership and management. 

Comparing the flu to Covid-19 isn't helpful. People who get the flu know they are sick pretty quick, can stay home and get better without infecting people. With Covid-19 you don't know you are sick right away, so you go around infecting people before you known you are sick so it it is much more contagious. 

The flu has killed about 23, 000 over the last six months in the US. Covid-19 is approaching half that in about three weeks. Many health officials also believe the actual number is much higher because people were dying with the same symptoms but not being tested for Covid-19 because we didn't have the testing ability and it wasn't part of the national attention until the last few weeks. 

The real concern is the strain being put on the health system, which if overburdened cannot treat everybody infected, including all the people who have other health problems.  This is already being seen in hospitals across the country. 

Point 1. It would be nice if everybody who suspected they had it was being tested. Unfortunately, the federal government is so incompetent despite knowing for at least three months this was coming we don't have enough tests to do it on anybody who suspects they have it. That is how it should be though. Failing to have the tests available despite having plenty of time to do so was a major muck up. 

Point 2. You are right, but it should be pointed out that the guy in the White House and Fox News was telling people it was a hoax. Maybe that was so they could dump their stocks. Nonetheless it is hard to take it seriously when the people who are supposed to be protecting the country seem to have little clue on what they are doing and telling everybody there was nothing to worry about. The numbers are also going up because initially we lacked the ability to test everybody who needed to be tested and obtaining the results was slow. The ability to test is improving so the numbers are going up. None of this should be surprising though since the guy in the White House got rid of the Office in the White House responsible for preparing for a pandemic. So all the people with the experience in this area and responsible for formulating a national response were canned. Not that it would matter to the current guy in the White House because he thinks he knows more than the scientists. 

Point 3. You may be right in terms of the US surging and the numbers quadrupling. Thankfully some of the State governors have demonstrated some leadership and we might contain the numbers despite the White House. The whole country should have been locked down a month ago, and we probably would have been coming out of this now.