• Your favorite

    Apple

    ,

    iPhone

    ,

    iPad

    ,

    iOS

    ,
    Jailbreak
    , and
    Cydia
    site.
  • Rivals, Regulators Backing Apple Ahead of iPhone Ban


    After the recent op-ed piece from Verizon's top lawyer published by the Wall Street Journal, other top companies and regulators are similarly stepping up to defend Apple, which may soon be subjected to an iPhone sales ban.

    As we know, the ITC determined last month that AT&T versions of the iPhone 4, 3GS and 3G infringe on patents owned by Samsung. Pursuant to the ruling, these devices must be banned from sale after August 3rd - this Saturday.

    According to The Wall Street Journal, a growing number of companies are now voicing concern - not just for Apple alone - but also about the supposedly unfavorable precedent that would be established. Product bans resulting from alleged patent infringements or violations is bad for consumers and for business, they say.

    AT&T, for example, believes that the ban would remove a critically important choice for consumers. In short, the removal from sale of older iPhones translates to a reduction of buying power for consumers on a budget looking to enter the iOS ecosystem.

    BSA, a trade group representing software makers including Microsoft Corp. and Oracle Corp. and chip maker Intel Corp., said the use of essential industry patents to ban products shouldn't be allowed except under unusual circumstances.
    "U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman has the authority to make the final decision on whether to allow the ITC ban," the WSJ reports. "It is rare for a presidential administration to veto an ITC order, the most recent instance occurring in 1987. If Mr. Froman doesn't intervene, the ban would take effect on Aug. 4."

    Source: WSJ
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Rivals, Regulators Backing Apple Ahead of iPhone Ban started by Michael Essany View original post
    Comments 7 Comments
    1. REMED1AL's Avatar
      REMED1AL -
      This actually makes the iPhone 5C make even more sense. A quick release will let them ditch the iPhone 4 and below to be replaced both price and product wise with the iPhone 5C and get out from under any Samsung patent infringement on those previous device.
    1. Perceptum's Avatar
      Perceptum -
      Quote Originally Posted by REMED1AL View Post
      This actually makes the iPhone 5C make even more sense. A quick release will let them ditch the iPhone 4 and below to be replaced both price and product wise with the iPhone 5C and get out from under any Samsung patent infringement on those previous device.
      Apple sells the 3G, 3GS, and 4 to developing countries due to the price of manufacturing and what the people can afford. A ban on these phone would hurt sales in these countries.
    1. claustin's Avatar
      claustin -
      Quote Originally Posted by REMED1AL View Post
      This actually makes the iPhone 5C make even more sense. A quick release will let them ditch the iPhone 4 and below to be replaced both price and product wise with the iPhone 5C and get out from under any Samsung patent infringement on those previous device.
      You're correct that it won't matter in a couple of months, but I think they're more concerned about the precedent it would set than anything. If they do it in this instance, then they will be more likely to do it in the future. Only consumers lose if this is allowed to take affect. Banning a product over FRAND patent issues is a dangerous precedent to set. If anything, just order Apple to pay Samsung a settlement amount and call it a day (although that also sets a dangerous precedent. Any lawsuit involving FRAND patents should put the accuser under the microscope as much as the accused).

      Quote Originally Posted by Perceptum View Post
      Apple sells the 3G, 3GS, and 4 to developing countries due to the price of manufacturing and what the people can afford. A ban on these phone would hurt sales in these countries.
      Isn't this just for import into the US? It shouldn't affect other countries, unless I'm mistaken. The ITC doesn't have the power to impose a worldwide ban, do they?
    1. XweAponX's Avatar
      XweAponX -
      I don't think so, but this precident can't be allowed to take hold.
    1. cmwade77's Avatar
      cmwade77 -
      Quote Originally Posted by REMED1AL View Post
      This actually makes the iPhone 5C make even more sense. A quick release will let them ditch the iPhone 4 and below to be replaced both price and product wise with the iPhone 5C and get out from under any Samsung patent infringement on those previous device.
      This has been my point for a while....I am wondering if Apple might announce something just shortly before the ban takes effect.
    1. unison999's Avatar
      unison999 -
      Quote Originally Posted by Perceptum View Post
      Apple sells the 3G, 3GS, and 4 to developing countries due to the price of manufacturing and what the people can afford. A ban on these phone would hurt sales in these countries.
      This would only affect U.S. sales.
      However Motorola can take this decision and get the iPhones banned at the rest of the countries fairly quickly if they enforces these type of laws.
    1. REMED1AL's Avatar
      REMED1AL -
      Quote Originally Posted by claustin View Post
      You're correct that it won't matter in a couple of months, but I think they're more concerned about the precedent it would set than anything. If they do it in this instance, then they will be more likely to do it in the future. Only consumers lose if this is allowed to take affect. Banning a product over FRAND patent issues is a dangerous precedent to set. If anything, just order Apple to pay Samsung a settlement amount and call it a day (although that also sets a dangerous precedent. Any lawsuit involving FRAND patents should put the accuser under the microscope as much as the accused).



      Isn't this just for import into the US? It shouldn't affect other countries, unless I'm mistaken. The ITC doesn't have the power to impose a worldwide ban, do they?
      Agreed. A ban would be worse for the consumer than Apple and basically defeats the purpose.

      In a way it would be better for consumers to wait and see which phone Apple sets as it's free phone next rather than buy an iPhone 4. Although that should be the consumers mistake to make not due to a ban on the phone.