Philip Elmer-DeWitt, summarizing ITC commissioner Dean Pinkert’s dissent in favor of Apple in the Samsung patent spat that culminated in Obama’s veto:
That the only time Samsung made such an offer — in oral
discussions in December 2012 — it came with strings attached to
which Apple could not agree.
What those strings were are blacked out in the document, but
Pinkert adds in the next sentence: “it is neither fair nor
non-discriminatory for the holder of the FRAND-encumbered patent
to require licenses to non-FRAND-encumberd patents as a
condition for licensing its patent” (emphasis his).
Reading between the lines, it sounds like Samsung had refused to
license its standard-essential patents (SEPs) unless Apple offered
its non-essential iPhone patents — the company’s crown jewels —
Frankly, I’m shocked that a company as scrupulous as Samsung would resort to this sort of extortion.