Feeds

USA reverses iPhone, iPad sales ban

Patent reform policy saves the day

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

US Trade Representative Michael Froman has recommended Samsung's bid to prevent Apple from selling its iPhone and iPad due to patent violations not be approved.

In a letter (PDF) dated August 3rd, Froman wrote to the Chair of the International Trade Commission (USITC) and laid out his reasons for deciding not to impose a sales ban.

The letter makes much of the Obama administration's January 2013 Policy statement on remedies for standards-essential patents subject to voluntary/FRAND commitments (PDF). That document outlines some of Obama's patent reform proposals, by encouraging offices like the USTIC to “consider whether a patent holder has acknowledged voluntarily through a commitment to license its patents on F/RAND terms that money damages, rather than injunctive or exclusionary relief, is the appropriate remedy for infringement.”

A quick bit of exposition: “FRAND” stands for “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” a term that is used to describe patent licensing conditions. FRAND is the US government's preferred way of licensing “SEPs” - standards-essential patents – that an entity holds but that really need to be licensed widely if complex systems are to be operable.

The policy statement we mention above discusses “FRAND-encumbered SEPs” and suggests exclusion orders like that being sought be Samsung should not be granted, because doing so stifles innovation.

Froman's letter explores that policy, finds no reason to disagree with it and he therefore “decided to disapprove the USITC's determination to issue an exclusion order and a cease and desist order in this investigation.”

It's business as usual then, for all concerned. Shelves will remain full at Apple stores throughout the USA, resellers and carriers in the land of the free remain free to sell iPads and iPhones. And lawyers can bank on more time in court representing either Apple or Samsung, as Froman concludes that his decision means “the patent owner may continue to pursue its rights through the courts.” ®

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
The 'fun-nification' of computer education – good idea?
Compulsory code schools, luvvies love it, but what about Maths and Physics?
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Lords take revenge on REVENGE PORN publishers
Jilted Johns and Jennies with busy fingers face two years inside
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
'Missy' Cummings on UAVs, smartcars and dying from boredom
Yes, yes, Steve Jobs. Look what I'VE done for you lately – Tim Cook
New iPhone biz baron points to Apple's (his) greatest successes
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
Edward who? GCHQ boss dodges Snowden topic during last speech
UK spies would rather 'walk' than do 'mass surveillance'
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Why and how to choose the right cloud vendor
The benefits of cloud-based storage in your processes. Eliminate onsite, disk-based backup and archiving in favor of cloud-based data protection.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.