This is the most misleading headline I have seen.
You obviously haven't been on HN very long :-)
Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
51–60 of 119 posts
Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
#52I 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 d…
Some of the criticism that's raised against presidents is about personal attributes, not policy. However, this kind of criticism is not a new phenomenon, and Obama isn't the greatest victim of this. For a recent example, many people were more fond of pointing at GWB's buffoonery than the problems with his policies and the actions of his administration.
Political debate in a de-facto two party system easily turns into a fight between partisan hacks.
Actually, even left and right aren't clear in real life politics. Is "crony capitalism" right or left?
Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
#53I'm a bit lost for words on this case. On one hand, I can't help but feel it would have been good for Apple to get a taste of their own medicine. At the same time, I think this excessive patent protection is harming the industry... In a perfect world, Apple would have never pursued Samsung in their frivolous extortion case, and this ban would never have reached the Obama admin. But this is a world motivated by cutthr…
I've traced the history several times over the past few years here, but suffice to say, Apple wasn't suing anyone until the mobile phone industry realized Apple's little toy was gobbling all the profits.
See this comment from 1,250 days ago, recapping early timeline: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1166321
And a comment from a year ago:
Over two [now three] years ago, I argued that patent suits were how the licensing game was played among the existing players. It was considered an everyday cost of doing business by the incumbents, but Apple wasn't well prepared for this. (They've learned fast.)
This wasn't on consumers' radar because none of the fights were as interesting as the juggernauts of Apple v. Android which get framed in almost religious terms and taken personally by users who have chosen a camp.
The argument then was that Apple had not been actively litgating patents, but when Nokia (faced with dwindling profits, most of which appeared to be landing in Apple's pockets) started the fight, and Kodak piled on, Apple had to demonstrate that the patents it was using to counter these suits were patents that it was actively defending. This pushed Apple to file against HTC, and eventually against others who, again, had all been actively (but boringly) suing one another before Apple got to the table.
Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
#54Judging 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?
They tried very hard in the Samsung case to get a large portion of their offerings banned but the judge wouldn't have it.
They also got HTC products banned from the US for relatively minor infringements.
Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
#55I 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 d…
I ended up ending a friendship because they posited that anyone who disagreed with an Obama policy was a racist that was too dumb to admit it.
Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
#56Although 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.
Entirely incorrect. Evidently, you neglected to read the details of the article. First, Samsung isn't mentioned at all, so there's no context for this specific debate. The fact that Microsoft or IBM gave more money to government officials means absolutely nothing when someone is trying to to decide between Apple and Samsung. Moreover, this article pertains only to a three month period. You can't possibly pretend that this data is conclusive.
I actually looked up the empirics. First, Samsung didn't really lobby at all until last year, whereas Apple has consistently spent millions. Even when Samsung did start expanding their lobbying efforts, Apple has outspent them by more than double every year.
The article to which you linked is in no way pertinent to the discussion, and totally betrays the actual statistics.
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000042406...
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000021754...
Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
#57Thank goodness! I was afraid Best Buy wouldn't be allowed to sell me an iPad 2 come Christmas.
Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, the justification for not going after banking or corporate malfeasance, according to Eric Holder, is that they're "Too Big to Jail". I have to say, as a committed small r republican wary of executive power, this kind of crap makes me crave Teddy Roosevelt.
Eric Holder admitted that he can't do his job. He needs to be fired.
To be fair, he's been busy leading brave soldiers against Washington's pot dispensaries, and running guns for Mexican gangs.
Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
#59There are at least 2 forms of hypocrisy here: a) Big > Small : smaller companies are subject to market forces and are expected to sink or swim as deemed by their own competitive merit, but Apple gets a hand when times are tough! This is essentially a State-assisted protection of private wealth owned by the few; Tim Cook and all the mutual funds and hedge funds that invested in AAPL can now sleep well at night knowing…
see also: Noam Chomsky
or Milton Friedman..
Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]
#60I 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!
Please explain how this instance of the government choosing winners and losers arbitrarily is pro free market?
Creating arbitrary rules that don't apply to businesses who are serving the 'public interest' (politically connected) is only one step away from a planned economy.