Jump to content



Photo

Obama vetoes ITC ban on Apple products


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#16 Tews

Tews

    Professional Lurker

  • 1,874 posts
  • Joined: 13-October 03
  • Location: Somewhere on a beach

Posted 05 August 2013 - 12:57

 

 


U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 7
 
Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto
All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose orconcur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law



#17 +techbeck

techbeck

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,692 posts
  • Joined: 20-January 05

Posted 05 August 2013 - 12:58

Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution grants the President the authority to veto legislation passed by Congress.

 

Yes, i know that much.  But still curious if you search, most sites are saying Obama vetoed this.  Even the WSJ is saying as much.

 

If you read the letter here, seems like Obama had a hand in it.

 

http://www.forbes.co...py-samsung-not/



#18 MorganX

MorganX

    MegaZilla™

  • 3,538 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Location: Midwest USA
  • OS: Digita Storm Bolt, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro w/Media Center Pack, Server 2k12 - Core i7 3770K/16GB DDR3/OCZ Vector 256GB/Gigabyte GTX 760
  • Phone: HTC One 64GB

Posted 05 August 2013 - 13:22

Yes, i know that much.  But still curious if you search, most sites are saying Obama vetoed this.  Even the WSJ is saying as much.
 
If you read the letter here, seems like Obama had a hand in it.
 
http://www.forbes.co...py-samsung-not/


"President Obama and his administration today issued a ..."

"The administration, which had 60 days to review the ITC’s June 4 “final determination,” announced its decision in a four-page letter by Ambassador Michael Froman"

It's not a big deal to me, but I doubt Obama made the decision. The staff in his administration responsible did, and he may or may not have approved "beforehand." I'm sure he knows about it now. I personally don't have a problem with it. I'm sure Obama would "like" to take credit for it, but there's no way he did the leg work on this one. He did what Presidents do. He heard the facts, the impact on the country, took advice, and approved the decision his administrators wanted to make. Either before or after they made it. This isn't a declaration of War or anything.

Florian Mueller of Foss Patents, who has been following Apple and Samsung’s case before the ITC, called today’s veto “a victory for consumers and fair competition.”

“This is the first veto of an ITC ruling in decades, and I believe the ITC’s majority opinion was so out of step with basic antitrust rules (such as tying) and its effects would have been so very anticompetitive and anti-innovative that this veto was unfortunately necessary,” Mueller said, noting that supporters of Apple, including AT&T, Verizon and a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators, have been speaking up in recent weeks.”The issue here is not primarily what would have happened to those older iPhones and iPads — I’m sure Apple could have handled the situation somehow. The problem is that this would have made the ITC the forum of choice for SEP abusers (strategic abusers who want to get away with infringement of non-SEPs as well as overly aggressive monetizers).”


#19 +techbeck

techbeck

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,692 posts
  • Joined: 20-January 05

Posted 05 August 2013 - 13:24

"President Obama and his administration today issued a ..."

"The administration, which had 60 days to review the ITC’s June 4 “final determination,” announced its decision in a four-page letter by Ambassador Michael Froman"

It's not a big deal to me, but I doubt Obama made the decision. The staff in his administration responsible did, and he may or may not have approved "beforehand." I'm sure he knows about it now. I personally don't have a problem with it. I'm sure Obama would "like" to take credit for it, but there's no way he did the leg work on this one. He did what Presidents do. He heard the facts, the impact on the country, took advice, and approved the decision his administrators wanted to make.

Florian Mueller of Foss Patents, who has been following Apple and Samsung’s case before the ITC, called today’s veto “a victory for consumers and fair competition.”

“This is the first veto of an ITC ruling in decades, and I believe the ITC’s majority opinion was so out of step with basic antitrust rules (such as tying) and its effects would have been so very anticompetitive and anti-innovative that this veto was unfortunately necessary,” Mueller said, noting that supporters of Apple, including AT&T, Verizon and a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators, have been speaking up in recent weeks.”The issue here is not primarily what would have happened to those older iPhones and iPads — I’m sure Apple could have handled the situation somehow. The problem is that this would have made the ITC the forum of choice for SEP abusers (strategic abusers who want to get away with infringement of non-SEPs as well as overly aggressive monetizers).”

 

From the link I posted and from the letter within....

 

 

Attached Images

  • Capture.PNG


#20 MorganX

MorganX

    MegaZilla™

  • 3,538 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Location: Midwest USA
  • OS: Digita Storm Bolt, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro w/Media Center Pack, Server 2k12 - Core i7 3770K/16GB DDR3/OCZ Vector 256GB/Gigabyte GTX 760
  • Phone: HTC One 64GB

Posted 05 August 2013 - 13:56

From the link I posted and from the letter within....


I don't disagree with that. "...evaluation, may, disapprove, approve, taken no action and allow." In other words, Presidential business as usual. The President usually gets directly involved in issues such as this, when there is an "incident," lol.

That's why President's administrative choices are important and often contested.

#21 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • 41,508 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 05 August 2013 - 15:47

I can't agree with that just on it's face. America is a big, powerful, complex country, economy, and government. It is simply not possible for the President to approve every decision, that's why he has a cabinet and administration.

It's quite possible he approved, but you can't assume that. Not for something like this. If it is homecooking, I'm sure the US isn't the first or last country to do something of this nature.

It's his Administration so whatever happens during his tenure is his responsibility.



#22 MorganX

MorganX

    MegaZilla™

  • 3,538 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Location: Midwest USA
  • OS: Digita Storm Bolt, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro w/Media Center Pack, Server 2k12 - Core i7 3770K/16GB DDR3/OCZ Vector 256GB/Gigabyte GTX 760
  • Phone: HTC One 64GB

Posted 05 August 2013 - 16:21

It's his Administration so whatever happens during his tenure is his responsibility.


That's why it's important to pick a good administration.

#23 +techbeck

techbeck

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,692 posts
  • Joined: 20-January 05

Posted 05 August 2013 - 16:49

That's why it's important to pick a good administration.

 

If only it was that easy.  You try to pick the lesser of two evils and you are always left with a jackass.



#24 FloatingFatMan

FloatingFatMan

    Resident Fat Dude

  • 14,316 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 04
  • Location: UK

Posted 05 August 2013 - 17:16

It's his Administration so whatever happens during his tenure is his responsibility.

 

Ultimate responsibility, sure. Doesn't mean he actually DID it though. It was probably one of a million memo's that crosses his desk every day.



#25 Dashel

Dashel

    Disgustipator

  • 7,498 posts
  • Joined: 03-December 01
  • Location: USA

Posted 05 August 2013 - 17:30

Illegal actions?  Samsung a non-American company?  Don't make me laugh.

 

Good for Obama, or whoever's name was on the veto.  They were well within their rights to do so and I agree.  Why do so many of you just see 'international' and go nutters to the point you start screaming protectionism and defiance of the global community?

 

"The problem is that this would have made the ITC the forum of choice for SEP abusers (strategic abusers who want to get away with infringement of non-SEPs as well as overly aggressive monetizers).” 

 

Sweet jebus.



#26 MorganX

MorganX

    MegaZilla™

  • 3,538 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Location: Midwest USA
  • OS: Digita Storm Bolt, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro w/Media Center Pack, Server 2k12 - Core i7 3770K/16GB DDR3/OCZ Vector 256GB/Gigabyte GTX 760
  • Phone: HTC One 64GB

Posted 05 August 2013 - 17:58

If only it was that easy.  You try to pick the lesser of two evils and you are always left with a jackass.

Sometimes evil is in the tinfoil ... 51% will always be happy, 49% unhappy with about 20% of those hunkered down waiting for Helter Skelter.

Illegal actions?  Samsung a non-American company?  Don't make me laugh.
 
Good for Obama, or whoever's name was on the veto.  They were well within their rights to do so and I agree.  Why do so many of you just see 'international' and go nutters to the point you start screaming protectionism and defiance of the global community?
 
"The problem is that this would have made the ITC the forum of choice for SEP abusers (strategic abusers who want to get away with infringement of non-SEPs as well as overly aggressive monetizers).” Sweet jebus.

 


I think more often than not it's about Obama than the actual content.



Click here to login or here to register to remove this ad, it's free!