WebProNews

Tag: ITC

  • Electric F-150 Battery Supply Endangered by Import Dispute

    Electric F-150 Battery Supply Endangered by Import Dispute

    Batteries for the electric F-150 may be in short supply due to an import dispute involving the Korean supplier Ford is using.

    The International Trade Commission (ITC) has banned Korea-based SK Innovation from importing batteries to the US for 10 years, according to Bloomberg. The ruling comes as a result of an accusation from Korea-based LG Chem, accusing SK Innovation of stealing trade secrets. The seemingly harsh ban was the result of SK Innovation destroying evidence LG Chem needed to prove its case.

    The ITC did provide a grace period to give automakers, including Ford and Volkswagen, time to make alternate arrangements. SK Innovation can import components for the F-150 for four years, and for the Volkswagen’s MEB line for two years.

    There are two factors that could play to SK Innovation’s favor. The company is building a factory in Georgia that will become operational later this year. While some components are still slated to be imported, when faced with a 10-year ban, the company may try to move all production to the US.

    As Bloomberg highlights, President Biden could also overrule the ITC’s decision on public policy grounds. Given the front-and-center focus climate change and green energy is taking in the new administration, it’s entirely possible SK Innovation’s ban may be seen as too damaging to electric vehicle endeavors.

  • ITC Bans Older iPhone Models From Entering The U.S.

    ITC Bans Older iPhone Models From Entering The U.S.

    Were you thinking about picking up an iPhone 4 on the cheap at AT&T? You might want to do so now as new shipments might not be making it here anytime soon.

    The Hill reports that the ITC ruled that Apple had infringed upon Samsung’s patents with the AT&T variants of the iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 3, iPad 3G and iPad 2 3G. The decision calls for an immediate ban on selling these devices in the U.S., as well as importing units into the country.

    Obviously, Apple will appeal the decision. It’s also confident that it will have no effect on its business. It’s easy to see why. It’s doubtful anybody buys the iPhone 4 anymore, and older iPad models are not really in vogue anymore either.

    Still, Samsung’s win is a pretty major blow to Apple. It may not hurt the company’s sales, but it does reverse a year of legal battles in the U.S. where Apple was always winning against Samsung. Last year, a jury found that Samsung had infringed upon numerous patents from Apple and were ordered to pay a little over $1 billion in damages. Since then, the damages award has been decreased, and the entire trial has even been called into question.

    As for elsewhere in the world, Samsung has been largely successful in challenging and defeating Apple on patent issues. Last year, it won patent battles in the Netherlands, Japan and Germany.

    After all of this, the Apple haters may be shouting for joy, but that only serves to distract from the very real problem of overly zealous patent litigation. It’s gotten to be an absolute mess with hardware designers being ever more careful with their products so as not to infringe the thousands of patents one company may hold on common sense actions.

    In the end, it’s only the consumer that hurts. Apple can shrug off a ban on iPhone 4 sales from a single carrier. The consumer can’t shrug off the fact that they’re being shafted by corporate warfare.

  • FTC Opposes Bans Over Standards Essential Patents

    Last week Tim Cook spent time on stage during the opening session of AllThingsD’s D10 Conference talking to Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher about a variety of topics. Among the issues discussed was Apple’s position on patent lawsuits. After from stating that patent litigation is “a pain in the ass,” Cook spent some time talking about how he believes the system is being abused by companies (he did not mention names like “Motorola”) who seek injunctions over standards essential patents.

    Standards essential patents cover technology that is vital to a particular industry, and the owners of such patents are legally obligated to license them on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Certain companies, however, have a pattern of declining to license these patents, instead seeking injunctions against the companies that allegedly infringe them. The fact that such litigation is allowed to continue, Cook said, is proof that the system is being abused and requires regulatory intervention to fix.

    Now it seems that the Federal Trade Commission agrees with Cook. Yesterday the FTC sent a letter to the International Trade Commission (ITC; keep your acronyms straight, there will be a quiz later) expressing concern over the handling of cases involving standards essential patents. Specifically, the FTC urged the ITC to deny efforts by Google subsidiary Motorola Mobility to block the importation of Microsoft’s Xbox 360 and Apple’s iPhone and iPad. Motorola has some time seeking injunctions against each device in various courts on the grounds that they violate certain standards essential patents that Motorola (now Google) owns.

    According to the letter, parts of which were published by CNet, the FTC is “concerned that a patentee can make a RAND commitment as part of the standard setting process, and then seek an e xclusion order for infringement of the RAND-encumbered SEP [standards essential patent] as a way of securing royalties that may be inconsistent with that RAND commitment.” Such actions, the FTC argues, are harmful to consumers, to innovation, and to competition.

    The FTC’s letter came in response to an ITC request for comment on Motorola Mobility’s ITC cases against Apple and Microsoft. The FTC, though, is not alone in wanting the ITC to enforce Motorola’s FRAND obligations. Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents is reporting today that several technology companies and industry organizations have also written to the ITC in support of the FTC’s position. Nokia, HP, Verizon, the Business Software Alliance, Retail Industry Leaders Association, and Association for Competitive Technology have all voiced their support. In addition, Microsoft has submitted its own letter in support of Apple’s case.

    Google’s purchase of Motorola Mobility has led many to wonder whether Google would continue pursuing its new subsidiary’s patent litigation, particularly the suits dealing with standards essential patents. I contacted Google in hopes of gaining some insight on that issue, however they have not yet responded.

  • Xbox 360 Getting United States Ban Hammer?

    Xbox 360 Getting United States Ban Hammer?

    The smackdown is about to be laid on Microsoft by the International Trade Commission after a Seattle judge has ruled in favor of Motorola Mobility in a huge patent lawsuit that was originally filed in 2010. Microsoft was handed a brutal blow when the International Trade Commission (ITC) was advised on Tuesday to ban the import and sale of Xbox systems in the United States.

    Judge David Shaw said Microsoft should be handed a cease-and-desist order on sales of Xbox 360 Slim consoles across the country. He also believes Microsoft should not only cease Xbox imports from China, as well as ban general sale of the console across the country, but also pay Motorola Mobility 7 per cent of the value of any unsold systems remaining in stores. We reported earlier that Google was demanding $4 billion a year to make this patent lawsuit go away, but this decision is way worse for Microsoft.

    Microsoft has warned the ITC that banning Xbox 360 across the US would not serve the public interest, because it would leave the market with a choice between PlayStation 3 and Nintendo’s Wii. Shaw rejected the argument, claiming that enforcing intellectual property rights takes precedence. Plus, it’s not as if the lack of Xbox 360’s means people go hungry or the world implodes. No matter how important the 360 thinks they are. Also, there is plenty of competition, so, with the addition of the WiiU this holiday season, there is a chance this could actually happen.

    The ITC commissioners can either allow the initial determination stand, or amend certain terms, or send it back for a rewrite. If Shaw’s recommendation is enacted, President Barack Obama will have 60 days to review the decision. Microsoft is a huge contributor, giving $852,167 to the Obama campaign in 2008, so it isn’t exactly clear to how the administration will lean, or if he doesn’t enact it, what happens.

    If this actually happens, look for the major companies in the world to slow their gadget/tech releases because they can no longer blatantly break patent laws and just “deal with it later.”

    picture courtesy of metalsupplychick