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

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!