Obama vetoes ITC ban on Apple products


Recommended Posts

 

President Barack Obama vetoed an International Trade Commission (ITC) ban on some models of the iPhone and iPad today.

The ban started in June and only affected older models like the iPhone 4 and the iPad 2 with cellular data connection. At the time, the ITC said those devices violated patents from Samsung.

Since iPhones and iPads are made overseas, the ITC was able to block them from being imported to the U.S. Obama's veto today means Apple will be able to ship those devices without worry.

 

It's good to see that Obama is completely bypassing illegal actions of Apple, the bans of ITC and simply saying F-U to every company that's not Apple out there.

 

Talk about free market and legal system. A great way to create inequality in the market. 

 

http://www.sfgate.com/technology/businessinsider/article/Obama-Vetoes-Ban-On-Some-iPad-And-iPhone-Models-4705218.php

 

What a signal to every non-American company that some American companies simply play by a completely different set of rules.

 

I wonder if he'll veto Samsung's infringements as well?  /s

It's good to see that Obama is completely bypassing illegal actions of Apple, the bans of ITC and simply saying F-U to every company that's not Apple out there.

 

Talk about free market and legal system. A great way to create inequality in the market. 

 

http://www.sfgate.com/technology/businessinsider/article/Obama-Vetoes-Ban-On-Some-iPad-And-iPhone-Models-4705218.php

 

What a signal to every non-American company that some American companies simply play by a completely different set of rules.

 

I wonder if he'll veto Samsung's infringements as well?  /s

 

Except Obama didn't veto anything, please read before you knee jerk.

 

http://allthingsd.com/20130803/obama-vetoes-apple-product-ban/

 

The veto came from Froman

I suppose you missed the post on the front page, stating that Michael Froman issued the veto? /s

Except Obama didn't veto anything, please read before you knee jerk.

 

http://allthingsd.com/20130803/obama-vetoes-apple-product-ban/

 

The veto came from Froman

Do you honestly believe that Obama wasn't complicit in the veto? The idea that members of his administration act without oversight lacks any credibility. As usual, whenever a legal ruling goes against American interests the US government?regardless of the political party in power?is all too happy to ignore international law / defy the international community and take unilateral action.

 

Obama was elected on the promise of change yet all he's delivered is more of the same. In terms of integrity he's even more of a failure than George W Bush.

Do you honestly believe that Obama wasn't complicit in the veto? The idea that members of his administration act without oversight lacks any credibility. As usual, whenever a legal ruling goes against American interests the US government?regardless of the political party in power?is all too happy to ignore international law / defy the international community and take unilateral action.

 

Obama was elected on the promise of change yet all he's delivered is more of the same. In terms of integrity he's even more of a failure than George W Bush.

 

 

Who knows, but I just don't like the disinformation you guys are spreading, and so I'll continue to correct it wherever I see fit.

Who knows, but I just don't like the disinformation you guys are spreading, and so I'll continue to correct it wherever I see fit.

It's not disinformation, as Obama is responsible for his administration. You're quibbling over semantics here. Once again Obama has demonstrated that he is not interested in respecting international law and will defy it whenever it serves American interests, even when such behaviour is counter-productive in the long run. He's just as much of a corporate shill as those who came before him.

Do you honestly believe that Obama wasn't complicit in the veto? The idea that members of his administration act without oversight lacks any credibility.

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.

I suppose you missed the post on the front page, stating that Michael Froman issued the veto? /s

 

Clearly he did, but lets not allow reality to intrude in his "Obama is the most evil president evar!" illusion...

 

https://www.neowin.net/news/obama-administration-overrules-itc-import-ban-of-older-apple-ios-devices

 

Most sites out there are saying Obama vetoed the ban and calling it a Presidential veto.  Not sure if Michael Froman can issue the veto himself, or if Obama needs to sign off on it.  Thought only the President has the authority to veto things like this

Most sites out there are saying Obama vetoed the ban and calling it a Presidential veto.  Not sure if Michael Froman can issue the veto himself, or if Obama needs to sign off on it.  Thought only the President has the authority to veto things like this

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

 

 

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

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.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/08/03/president-obama-vetoes-itc-ban-on-iphone-ipads-apple-happy-samsung-not/

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.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/08/03/president-obama-vetoes-itc-ban-on-iphone-ipads-apple-happy-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).?

"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....

 

 

post-91978-0-13567800-1375709073.png

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
    • Interesting share -- however it does not make sense: Email messages get stored somewhere, so how is Delta Chat "based on email" and decentralized without actually storing anything? By Web3 standard practices, the various Relays would require dedicated storage to make messages available to the recipients (like a large series of message queue channels, akin to racks of traditional post office boxes)... and Contacts must be two-way confirmed in order for encryption keys to be exchanged (ostensibly every key-pair is uniquely bound between sender and recipient) and the Relays would preserve the public keys in order to facilitate message carriage... or every device stores all sorts of keys and contact info. All of this to say, decentralized messaging is like running Bluesky nodes except instead of discovering/browsing public feeds by various posters (at the given node) these Delta Chats would be relaying encrypted messages (via Relays) that only trusted recipients would have the appropriate decryption key (their own private key) to read it. But this doesn't solve the "it's like email" sales pitch. The only way it's like email is that there's encrypted binary stuff being transported from your app into the federated ether of Delta Chat Relays for others to decrypt (hopefully only the intended recipient)... but outside of this federated relays framework, it is absolutely nothing like email.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!