Verizon Lawyer Calls for Apple v. Samsung Presidential Intervention to Prevent iPhone Ban

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jul 25, 2013.

  1. macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Ahead of an upcoming import ban on older Apple devices, Verizon attorney Randal Milch has published an open letter via The Wall Street Journal, calling for presidential intervention in the case to veto the ban.
    The import ban was originally scheduled back in June, after the U.S. International Trade Commission reached a decision on an ongoing Apple vs. Samsung patent case. The ITC ruled that Apple infringed on Samsung Patent No. 7,706,384, entitled "Apparatus and method for encoding/decoding transport format combination indicator in CDMA mobile communication system."

    A cease and desist order was issued on several Apple products, including AT&T models of the iPhone 3GS and 4, the iPad 3G, and the iPad 2 3G. The ban did not go into effect immediately, however, as such rulings are given a 60 day window for the White House to intervene.

    Though Verizon is not directly affected by case as it pertains solely to AT&T products, Milch believes that such a ban would further encourage patent abuse.
    While a presidential veto on an ITC decision has not happened since 1987, Milch suggests that intervention is necessary when the patent holder is not using the technology (as is often the case with patent trolls), when the patent holder has agreed to license the patent on reasonable terms, or when the infringement is unimportant to the overall product. Apple's infringement on Samsung's patent falls into the third category.

    "There are more than 250,000 patents relevant to today's smartphones," Milch writes. "It makes no sense that exclusion could occur for infringement of the most minor patent."

    Without intervention, the cease and desist order on Apple products will go into effect on August 5, 2013. Apple has filed for an appeal and has also requested a stay on the ban.

    Article Link: Verizon Lawyer Calls for Apple v. Samsung Presidential Intervention to Prevent iPhone Ban
  2. macrumors 68000

    Four oF NINE

    Sep 28, 2011
    This is a surprising development. When might we hear more?
  3. macrumors regular

    Jun 8, 2010
    The lawyer is worried because he cant afford the newer iphone only the 4s!
  4. macrumors 6502


    Oct 3, 2009
    the low cost iphone as a replacement for the 4s makes more sense now
  5. macrumors 6502a


    Aug 20, 2008
    so what. apple will discontinue those products anyway this fall.
    apple is just buying time. next.

    * however as a principle, this ridiculous patent war is out of hand. the whole system of patents need a major overhaoul how they are awarded and enforced.
  6. macrumors 68000


    Jan 12, 2011
    Bel Air, CA
    How does this even matter if the 4S (and lower) are rumored to be discontinued soon anyway?
  7. macrumors 6502a


    Jul 15, 2011
  8. macrumors member

    Aug 21, 2010
    I'm not sure I'm following: isn't Verizon CDMA? Then why is only AT&T (which is not CDMA) concerned by this ban?

    Doesn't the patent concern CDMA technologies?
  9. macrumors regular

    Jun 11, 2008
    New Jersey
    That was my thought when I read it.
  10. macrumors 68020


    Jul 23, 2010
    I dunno, somewhere in West Texas
    I'm pretty sure the president has more pressing matters to attend to than to worry about Samsung and Apple's pissing contest.
  11. macrumors 601


    Feb 19, 2008
    The Finger Lakes Region
    It's 4G (the US Marketing hyped version).
  12. macrumors P6


    Apr 1, 2005
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    "Though Verizon is not directly affected by case as it pertains solely to AT&T products, Milch believes that such a ban would further encourage patent abuse."

    Perhaps Verizon wants to stop all this patent trolling stuff and potential lawsuits against Verizon in the future.
  13. macrumors 65816

    Jan 8, 2009
    Just settle this by a decision that Apple owes Samsung one billion dollars, then just call this whole stupid patent mess even, and MOVE ON!! :)
  14. macrumors 6502


    Feb 14, 2012
    I think we have seen a major decline in lawsuits since the passing of Jobs, or at least it is out of the media's eye as much. I truly think that these lawsuits are a waste of resources, considering the back and forth money transfer, and there is no winner. Everyone should make the best product they can, and do their best not to copy, without suing and making it all about the lawsuit.
  15. macrumors 6502


    Jul 25, 2010
    This is another ridiculous thing about the U.S. patent system. You can use a trivia patent to stop a product from coming to this country.
  16. macrumors regular

    Aug 14, 2008
    "Though Verizon is not directly affected by case as it pertains solely to AT&T products, Milch believes that such a ban would further encourage patent abuse."

    Good Guy Verizon.
  17. macrumors regular

    May 22, 2013
    where ever I am at.
    If I remember right, code division multiple access applies to AT&T's standard for "4G" as well as Verizon's traditional technology.

    I may be wrong though... It's been a while since I really cared about some of that stuff.
  18. macrumors 603


    May 21, 2012
    Lobbyists and corporate donors disagree
  19. macrumors 6502

    Mar 9, 2012
    And by that time Apple will release the low-cost iPhone.

    Maybe this is one more reason for Apple to come up with `low-cost iPhone`.
  20. macrumors 6502

    Dec 26, 2011
    In 2 more months, those aforementioned Apple products will have been discontinued. Duh!
    Then 2 sides can settle the $ score.
  21. macrumors 6502

    Mar 9, 2012
    Do their best not to copy? Hahahaha.... So it`s okay to copy if you try your best not to but end up copying? LOL!
  22. macrumors 6502a

    Jun 9, 2013
    Wait, I thought CDMA pertained only to Verizon. AT&T uses GSM.
  23. macrumors 603


    Aug 2, 2002
    Cork, Ireland.
    Oddly appropriate signature!
  24. macrumors 6502a

    Jun 9, 2013
    Maybe if we keep saying that a few more times, it'll fix it.
  25. macrumors G4

    Oct 23, 2010
    It's more the precedent. The letter to the WSJ even states that Verizon isn't directly affected since only AT&T iPhones are affected. However, Verizon is concerned that the ITC's sole remedy (import bans) is ill-suited for many patent disputes, particularly where the "injured party" has licensing agreements with others, and thus has already concluded that royalties are sufficient compensation. Unfortunately, the ITC can't award royalties (but a federal court can). The ITC can only impose import bans.

    The issue isn't one particular phone. It's whether or not patent disputes will lead to a more widescale disruption in the industry if manufacturers successfully win import bans based on minor patents.

Share This Page