Bugger, more iThings will just be sent to Europe to be sold.
US trade watchdog puts down the phone to Qualcomm, reaches for probe, sticks it in Apple
America's international trade watchdog is officially probing Apple over claims its iPhones and iPads infringe technology patents. The ITC announced Tuesday it had begun a Section 337 investigation of the Cupertino giant to assess whether iOS smartphones and fondleslabs should be banned from being imported into America because …
COMMENTS
-
-
Wednesday 9th August 2017 02:13 GMT chuckufarley
Why do iGet the feeling...
...that this battle is more about what is (or isn't) happening in Southeast Asia than what is happening in the USA? Yes, the iThings are sold in the USA. However they are built halfway around the world and it seems to me that the battle should take place there. Banning the products in the sale USA doesn't do as much for Qualcomm as banning the manufacturing of the infringing products in Taiwan, China, et al. The US may have a huge market share and deep pockets but nothing is really made there. So retailers can only sell what they are given to sell. If Apple can't sell them in one country it can sell them in another. But if Apple can't make them at all it can't sell them anywhere.
-
Wednesday 9th August 2017 05:29 GMT Steve Davies 3
Re: Why do iGet the feeling...
QC has had to pay some reallyheavy fines in Asia for how it does business so I think that going after iFruity there is a non starter.
What puzzles me is that if there is sometihng infringing QC's patents, it is the Intel Modem. Why has QC not gone after Intel?
All of this would go away if Apple bent over and allowed WC to carry on shafting them for a percentage of each iDevice sold with their modems inside.
It is as if you went to buy a car and find that there is a 5% levy for using Pirelli's and not Bridgestones.
-
Wednesday 9th August 2017 07:00 GMT eldakka
Re: Why do iGet the feeling...
Banning the products in the sale USA doesn't do as much for Qualcomm as banning the manufacturing of the infringing products in Taiwan, China, et al.
Patents are granted on a country-by-country basis and, unlike copyright, because you have a patent on concept X in the US doesn't mean you have a patent on the same concept X in China.Therefore the devices at their point of manufacture could be perfectly legal, not infringe any patents at all. Or, maybe they do infringe patents at their point of manufacture, but the manufacturer might have the legal system of that country in their pockets, so it won't get enforced against them.
However, the US may have granted patents (or be more willing to enforce them) on concept X, therefore the perfectly-legally manufactured device in China may be an illegal, patent infringing, device in the US.
-
-
-
Wednesday 9th August 2017 14:12 GMT User McUser
I Clearly Do Not Understand Patent Law
[Qualcomm] wants an import ban placed on iPhones and iPads that use Intel-made wireless broadband modems, the operation of which allegedly infringes six patents held by Qualcomm.
Surely Qualcomm should be suing INTEL then? Apple is merely buying Intel's chips so not sure how that would infringe any patents...
Apple usually uses Qualcomm modem chips in its handhelds, but has started using Intel components in some of its latest products. Qualcomm reckons Apple's use of Intel's technology tramples on its patents, hence the import ban request.
I know lawyers like money but how is this even a lawsuit? Does Qualcomm have a patent on device manufacturers buying chips from their competitors?
-
Wednesday 9th August 2017 15:21 GMT Peter Johnston 1
The bullies don't like their own methods. Apple has been feral with its IP for decades - back to the NEXT days. Intel, of course, is well known for shutting AMD out of the chip market by bribing partners to go Intel only - also for decades. Both got only a slap on the wrist from the government.
Now China is standing up to these bullies. This will define tech for the next generation. If the US wins, tech will stop moving forward, if the US loses, it will lose control. Lose, lose. But we win.