Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

ustr.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 119 posts

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#41

Post by corresation »

comex wrote: post #19
jivatmanx wrote: post #8

Intervening in one case for an iconic American company is protectionism, not free trade. That would have entailed reforming the patent system for everyone. This is ominous, what if this is remembered as the equivalent of Smoot-Hawley? Patents are a hell of a lot more complex than tariffs... and at least the ITC is trying to do international coordination here, and Obama has just blatantly undermined them.

Taking legal action against FRAND abuse is hardly unique to the US. http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/12/european-commission-to-is... See also Mueller on this veto; while I often disagree with him, I tend to agree on this issue: http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/08/obama-administration-veto...

The ITC specifically considered FRAND, so interesting that you or the perpetually wrong troll Mueller decide that it is abuse.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#42

Post by dictum »

asveikau wrote: post #30
hga wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you had any familiarly with "the president's opponents", you would know we label this as "crony capitalism" (much more akin to original formula Italian fascist corporatism), and have so since at least the 2009 cram-down of Chrysler's secured bond holders. While of course partisan, this OPED by the Republican governor of Indiana lays out the issues and some of the longer term consequences and outcomes: http://onlin…

Thanks, good sir, for confirming everything I was saying. (It's funny that you begin by assuming I am unfamiliar with such positions. Thinking they are goofy, humorous and exaggerated is very different from never having been exposed to them. It was exactly this exposure that compelled me to write this, even knowing that it would be a target of downvotes and flames.)

"Action against regulation of large corporations with good relationships with the government" is only a subset of "action against regulation of business".

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#43

Post by ruswick »

asveikau wrote: post #4

I know political discussion on HN is frowned upon by some, but I get amused thinking of hypothetical reaction from the president's opponents. This seems to be an action against regulation of business, but it's the Obama administration, therefore... Communism! Apple is in the tank for Obamacare!

It's upsetting that some proponents of this administration dismiss its critics because they presume that they dislike him categorically. It is this sort of bigoted presumption and political antagonism that is causing the erosion of political discourse in this country. This issue is not that Obama has critics, it's that some people believe that he shouldn't.

Why is it so difficult for people to accept that those who disagree with them aren't just trying to antagonize them, and may have actual, legitimate political orientations and views?

Instead of dismissing everyone with whom you disagree and painting them as irrational bigots, why don't you attempt to discuss something with them?

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#44

Post by rhizome »

mtgx wrote: post #15
revelation wrote: post #6

What a joke. So good to see the president is finally tackling the patent abuses, by protecting local trolls from a taste of their very own medicine. (The justification here being that this ban is not "in the interest of the public". If this was considered in ay other cases, we'd all be paying cents for generics from India instead of thousands of millions for the brand version)

This is what increasingly bothers me lately about the decisions they make. They're sacrificing a lot of stuff "in the interest of public good". It seems like a lot of collectivism. "We can't put bankers in prison because this way it's better for the public/the economy" "We can't punish any corporation with more than a relatively minor fine, because that would hurt the public" "We can't let a judge's decision about ba…

Don't forget that 9/11 didn't just affect 3000 people and their families and friends, it was attack on us all.

EDIT: guess I touched a nerve.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#45

Post by voodoo123 »

Judging by the comments here, people on HN hate Apple more than they hate patents.

Incidentally - for those suggesting that Apple should get a taste of its own medicine, what on earth are you talking about? Since when did Apple have competitors products banned?

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#46

Post by Mikeb85 »

voodoo123 wrote: post #45

Judging by the comments here, people on HN hate Apple more than they hate patents. Incidentally - for those suggesting that Apple should get a taste of its own medicine, what on earth are you talking about? Since when did Apple have competitors products banned?

Is this a joke?

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#47

Post by voodoo123 »

ruswick wrote: post #37

Although there is clear legal justification for this veto, I still fear that it was issued for perverse reasons. Apple is a lobbying juggernaut and is a favorite among the Government. Undoubtedly, Apple exerted extreme pressure on this decision, and I have severe doubts that this same conclusion would have been reached had Apple sought an embargo on Samsung products. Absurd cases and wholesale perversion of intellect…

Utterly false. Apple is not a lobbying juggernaut at all and spends less on lobbying than any of the other major tech companies: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76073.html

Apple is also taking a serious beating from Obama's DOJ. So clearly not 'a favorite' of the governments.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#48

Post by Terretta »

ruswick wrote: post #37

Although there is clear legal justification for this veto, I still fear that it was issued for perverse reasons. Apple is a lobbying juggernaut and is a favorite among the Government. Undoubtedly, Apple exerted extreme pressure on this decision, and I have severe doubts that this same conclusion would have been reached had Apple sought an embargo on Samsung products. Absurd cases and wholesale perversion of intellect…

> Apple is a lobbying juggernaut

Wrong.

Apple's not even in the top ten tech companies. In 2012, Google spent $18M while Apple spent $1.9M, less than Google, Microsoft, Hp, Oracle, IBM, Facebook, Intel, Cisco, Amazon, and Dell.

Handy chart:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/02/18/apple-reduced-fede...

Key quotes: "Apple has historically spent less than its rivals on government lobbying" and "Apple's lobbying efforts were spread out pretty thinly over a wide range of issues".

So, pretty much the opposite of "juggernaut".

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#49

Post by Samuel_Michon »

tmister wrote: post #29

And Gruber yesterday posted a link indicating that Apple's punishment of recent e-book trial was result of Amazon's good relation with Obama administration http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/08/02/amazon . I wonder what will he say now.

I think few people, including Gruber, expected the Obama administration would step in. It was a possibility, but it wasn’t at all likely.

As for the ebook farce: Apple was told by Capitol Hill insiders that it should increase its lobbying efforts (like Amazon and Google), otherwise bad things might happen.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76073.html

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#50

Post by hga »

ruswick wrote: post #37

Although there is clear legal justification for this veto, I still fear that it was issued for perverse reasons. Apple is a lobbying juggernaut and is a favorite among the Government. Undoubtedly, Apple exerted extreme pressure on this decision, and I have severe doubts that this same conclusion would have been reached had Apple sought an embargo on Samsung products. Absurd cases and wholesale perversion of intellect…

A reply to both Terretta and voodoo123: you don't suppose putting the former Democratic vice president on your board improves, not to mention leverages, lobbying "power", do you?

At the very least, whatever Al Gore is getting paid should probably get added to the official lobbying expenses.

Post reply on HN