It would have been more surprising if the ruling wasn't vetoed. American company vs Korean company. This outcome was expected ever since ITC made the ruling. But it basically sets a precedence that iPhone 4 isn't paying the licensing fees on stuff they are using. At the sametime they are in court trying to get others to pay the licensing fees...
'Samsung says Apple has refused to pay licensing fees for its patents'. Now with this "Presidential veto" on their side, what if Apple refuses to pay licensing fee for further imports or compensation to Samsung of any kind whatsoever? What will the US ITC do? Overrule the President and ban iPhone - because there wouldn't be any other way to make Apple cough money which they owe to Samsung.
If I own Samsung, I will ban my own products in the USA and will not provide support for those who will import it. This news clearly shows how Bias the US government is. I wonder if they will do the same if the companies are reversed. Obama is an iSheep, duh.
It is not hard to tell who is wrong.
When you need the government to ban the decissions made by a court you are not playing fair at all.
It's almost xenophobia!
In this case U.S.A government is just showing that despite what they try to make us believe, they are not far from some dictatorial governments.
- click to read, 04 Aug 2013are you one of the people Samsung pays for comments?Surely you dont know what innovation is.
That is unfair. If I were Sammy I would stop selling Phones in the US. Let Americans use only crappy ipongs (iphone) and the rest of the planet will be using Galaxies.
Since you mentioned the new Note 2 with Snapdragon 600, I think you know that that means two things, first: they knew the 600 performed better, second: they gave a big middle finger to the losers who adopted the first Note 2. You know that is true.
They also knew the 800 performed better than their so called chip and did the same thing with the S4.
Sony wouldnt do that, would they?
JBird, 04 Aug 2013Actually there is no Note II with Qualcomm only the one which will release this month with S60... moreI never said Note 2 had a Qualcomm chip, I said Samsung use parts made by American and Japanese companies, not all of the parts for sure.
What im saying is that this company was less than garbage a few years ago, it was after they started copying Apple and other companies that they sold anything, and thats because their copied devices were less expensive that Apple's because they were and still are garbage.
The Exynos used in Note 2 is nothing compared to the Snapdragon 600 or 800 BTW, not to mention that Exynos 5 didnt initially support LTE... Pathetic, disgusting company.
Copying, using cheap materials, and on top of that messing with benchmark results.. Im about to vomit..
1Stormrider1, 04 Aug 2013While Note 2 is a decent device indeed, it cannot be compared to the Z Ultra or the upcoming H... moreActually there is no Note II with Qualcomm only the one which will release this month with S600.
Exynos always better than Qualcomm in levels except the 5410 batch, but the rest of Exynos chips they were always better than Qualcomm "Check it in SIII and SII, SI, Exynos version always better".
And There are batch of S III and Note II with Samsung CMOS and you can check it here PDF File:
-Samsung CMOS info:
Anonymous, 04 Aug 2013Ultra with that huge bezel and without flash. Good luck compared that to the Note 3.Your "Note 3" with flash is going to be using an image sensor made by Sony
You are the best and you will stay the best,
Don't care about this
You are most welcome in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the whole world is your fans
American judges, american courts, american company...so big surprise.
Isn't it the licence that allows manufactures to incorporate a single chip to be used across different frequency spectrum's? i.e 1 phone for any country rather then multiple phones with different chips, If i recall Samsung and 11 others spent big $$$ in making this a reality.
Which is why it effects iphone 4 and earlier and not iPhone 4S or 5 since they are using a 2nd chip from Qualcomm, who buys their licence from Samsung in turn.
So is this really FRAND, they can use multiple chips to get the same effect without paying a licence like they have started to do recently. However using multiple chips does decrease the space and increases the cost of the device.
What this means is Apple free loading off of others which they have done since the mouse and GUI for MAC.
All this is about is protecting the company from foreign interests, whether it is wrong or not.
I think its easy. Apple should have tried to get the license from Samsung before using it in their products.
S4 forever, 04 Aug 2013this decision reminds me of the recent ruling in the Florida court....me too, but you see, it also reminds me how "they" are deeply disappointed at Russian Federation government because they are protecting a certain someone...
this just tells the world something along the lines: "we are the USA we do whatever we want wherever we want whenever we want"; but then again... the rest of the world says "no".. or at least a good part of it, also as stated apple will have to pay samnsung, and this is far from being over.
on another side, it is because of these politics that i be happy when i see Chinese copies of apple products, that in most cases work better than the original itself, but that's just me
Good job, Obama! Samsung is up to their dirty tricks again. Samsung should license their SEP to Apple the same way they do for everyone else. Samsung is ramping up their paid trolls for this story I see.
JBird, 04 Aug 2013Note II blows latest Sony's phone out of water FYI. You should win the most biased comment of... moreWrong aboit Note II blowing sony Z ultra out of the water, the Z Ultra is so much faster its in a league of its own
Shame! I dont like samsung but apple is the worst in the world with glass stares patent and staff