How Do I Create A "Restricted Profile"

This blog covers software patent news and issues with a particular focus on wireless, điện thoại devices (smartphones, tablet computers, connected cars) as well as select antitrust matters surrounding those devices.

Bạn đang xem: How do i create a "restricted profile"

The popularity of the United States International Trade Commission (USITC, or just ITC) as a patent litigation forums is largely attributable lớn the difficulties patent holders face in U.S. federal court. District courts are usually slower than the ITC, and even after final liability findings in your favor, it"s still doubtful whether -- & when -- you"re going lớn obtain meaningful remedies. The state of affairs in the first Apple v. Samsung litigation in the Northern District of California is a good example: the complaint was filed in April 2011, và in August2012 a jury found Samsung to lớn infringe half a dozen Apple patents. The court declined lớn overrule the jury on these liability findings, but Apple was denied a permanent injunction (the related appellate hearing will take place next Friday) & khổng lồ date has not received even one cent of damages.

By contrast, Samsung"s June 2011 ITC complaint against Apple resulted in a liability finding only with respect lớn a FRAND-pledged standard-essential patent (SEP), but the ITC ordered an import ban in a controversial outlier decision, which will take effect on Monday unless stayed or vetoed at the 11th hour. A ruling on Apple"s ITC countercomplaint against Samsung is due next Friday, so Apple may also win an ITC import ban prior khổng lồ any actual remedy in district court.

The ITC"s willingness to lớn order import bans over FRAND-pledged SEPs, its outlier positions on the antitrust issue of tying (1, 2) and the easy access lớn injunctions it provides to patent trolls are policy issues. Despite concerns about the efficiency and transparency of the related enforcement procedures và a drop-out rate of patent assertions by major operating companies near the 100% mark, patent infringers still fear the ITC.

Xem thêm: Cty Tnhh Hoàng Gia Luật, Có Nên Làm Việc Tại Công Ty Tnhh Hoàng Gia Luật?

Google"s Motorola Mobility is a company that has been unable khổng lồ prevail on any offensive clalặng so far at the ITC. It has three appeals of dismissals of its ITC claims going (1, 2, 3). It has been successful in its defense against Apple"s complaint (Apple appealed that dismissal), but in May2012 Microsoft won an import ban against Motorola"s Android-based devices implementing a particular scheduling feature, và Microsoft is working hard to prevail on several more patents with an appellate hearing to take place on Tuesday (August6).

Contrary to popular misbelief, ITC import bans are usually not limited lớn particular devices but relate to lớn all devices by a particular company infringing a patent in a certain way, unless there are differences with respect khổng lồ licensing (for example, Samsung affirmatively did not accuse newer Apple products, which come with Qualcomm basebvà chipsets, of infringement of its UMTS SEP).

Thus it wouldn"t matter that the new MotoX điện thoại thông minh was not available at the time of the investigation of Microsoft & Apple"s complaints. But in a filing in the enforcement-related dispute between Microsoft and certain government agencies & officials, Google states another reason for which the MotoX, in its opinion, falls outside the scope of an ITC import ban such as the one obtained by Microsoft (cliông chồng on the image to enlarge or read the text below the image):

"Motorola recently announced a new line of phones, the MotoX™, that will be assembled in the United States and are therefore not subject khổng lồ the exclusion order. <...>"

Forbes contributor Tlặng Worstall explained the difference between Made in America and Assembled in America in a recent post. The only part of the manufacturing of the MotoX phone that takes place in the United States is final assembly. Arguably, Google"s emphasis of assembly in the U.S. is a sale ploy. It may also be politically-motivated. And it"s fairly likely that Google"s analysis of the upside & downside of assembly in the U.S. also involved a plan for an over run around the ITC"s jurisdiction.

In a 2011 ruling on an S3Graphics complaint against Apple, the ITC clarified the boundaries of its mandate. The ITC can prohibit the importation of devices that infringe an asserted patent claim if the act of importation itself constitutes a violation -- as opposed lớn post-importation activities by the importer. For the MotoX, multiple components of wil be shipped in a non-assembled form to lớn the U.S., and it"s possible that Google"s Motorola ensures that the Android software is installed only in the U.S. và not prior to lớn importation. If an infringement dispute ever arises with respect khổng lồ the MotoX, we"ll all find out more about the manufacturing chain for this device. For now, what"s clear is Google"s position: it believes that final assembly in the U.S. puts the sản phẩm outside the scope of an ITC exclusion order. If Google is right, patent holders can only assert their rights by suing in U.S. federal court (or in foreign jurisdictions), and Apple v. Samsung shows how difficult and time-consuming that process is.

If you"d like lớn be updated on the điện thoại thông minh patent disputes và other intellectual property matters I cover, please subscribe to lớn my RSS feed (in the right-hvà column) and/or follow me on Twitter