How the ITC Forced a Veto in the Samsung-Apple Patent Case

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 — in return.

Frankly, I’m shocked that a company as scrupulous as Samsung would resort to this sort of extortion.

Monday, 5 August 2013