FTC sides with Apple on Google’s attempt to iPhone and iPad

December 7, 2012

    Google’s attempt to ban Apple’s iPhone and iPad in the US is in jeopardy, as the FTC has decided to support Apple.

    Google seeked a ban on Apple’s popular mobile devices on the basis of Standard Essential Patents (SEP). Google’s Motorola Mobility division holds SEPs that it is obligated to license to other companies under fair and non-discriminatory terms.

    FTC says that the ban the Google requested would be harmful to consumers, and it would also damage innovation and result in increased costs and uncertainty for other companies. In a statement, the Commission said that using SEP-based injunctions against competitors is equivalent to a ‘patent hold up’.

    Here’s the FTC’s relevant statement on the issue:

    “Hold-up and the threat of hold-up can deter innovation by increasing costs and uncertainty for other industry participants, including those engaged in inventive activity. It can also distort investment and harm consumers by breaking the connection between the value of an invention and its reward — a connection that is the cornerstone of the patent system.”

    Google’s (through Motorola) attempt to ban Apple products is seen as too aggressive by many industry watchers.  Critics say that Google should have settled instead of taking the battle over SEP (which it is obligated to licence) to ban it’s biggest rival’s product.

    FTC has always been vocal when about Google’s attempt to obtain on bans based on SEP patents; the agency made similar comments when the Mountain View company tried to get import bans on Microsoft’s Xbox.

    Comments

    • masterdebater

      So if Google does it, it’s harmful to consumers and innovation. But when Apple does it… oh forget about it.

    • James

      So Samsung makes their phone rectangular, with some colourful buttons and gets to pay Apple a billion dollars. Apple steals radio tech for their phone and NOTHING! Money walks and……

      • rikomenzies

        According to the article, the refusal of Google’s request centers on standards-essential patents, which it’s required to license out. That’s a bit different from a phone allegedly looking like another.

        • http://www.impulsivestudios.com/ Justin Myers

          Its a rectangle with rounded corners…

    • IncCo

      Corruption all over the place obviously !

    • http://www.facebook.com/nithin1993 Nithin Gowda

      retarded ftc officials
      i think its time for us(consumers) to do something about this

      • Morgan Thaler

        Ultimately it always falls to the consumers to teach companies like Apple that they can’t ride roughshod over their potential and actual customers. The trouble is that Apple customers keep buying so there no incentive for Apple to change their business practices AND Apple buyers deserve to be treated like suckers.

        • Michael

          sucker because there blinded from seeing better options- android or note 2. the main areas of being suckers is buying high and product braking early and left high and dry.

    • p3ngwin

      anyone notice the headline missing a key-word ?

      • Ed Baker

        Or “the Google” and the use of “Google seeked” when it should have been “sought”. This article was a very hard read. Almost like it was sent through a translation program. Really gave me a head pain.

        • p3ngwin

          yeah, i was going to let “sought” slide as it’s probably an American writer, and American Internet bloggers aren’t renowned for their eloquence, the rest was harder to excuse though.

          such a badly written piece.

    • arcwindz

      Damage innovation? Increased cost? Apple??? there are some words that seem a little bit weird here…

    • Chris Harpner

      A polite request to please proof read your article for its many mistakes.

      Regarding the content: Seems like Apple ALWAYS gets the positive side of these judgments. Apple gets to ban products, but nobody gets to ban Apple when they do exactly the same thing. Maybe it’s who you know in the government that matters, not what you do nor what the law is.

    • joe

      fvcken BS

    • aholsteinson

      Wow who wrote this article? Ever heard of proof reading? As far as the news goes, Apple seems to be a sacred cow in these things, they can ban whatever they want and it is fair game but it is always unfair to ban them.

    • Karim

      This article was very hard to read. It gave me a headache trying to figure out what the author is trying to say. Please proof read next time before posting an article.

    Popular

    Latest