CCIA Response To USTR’s Veto of ITC Ban On Apple Products
8/5/2013
The following is a statement of Ed Black,
President & CEO of the Computer & Communications Industry Association
(CCIA) in response to the U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman’s decision
to veto the International Trade Commission's (ITC's) import ban against Apple
products:
“The
Administration’s unprecedented decision to veto an ITC "Section 337"
import ban against Apple for infringing Samsung’s intellectual property is a
disruptive and potentially dangerous development that calls into question the fairness
of our trading regime and could undermine the
way US companies are treated globally.
“It is important to remember that Apple
initiated legal proceedings against Samsung and others in venues all over the
world. Apple’s success has been mixed, and a number of its patents have been
controversial.
“If Samsung is not afforded equal treatment by
the USTR, this seemingly arbitrary and non-appealable decision on behalf of a
giant American competitor threatens to undermine our relationships with our
trading partners and international respect for national patent systems.
“This decision points to the need for
comprehensive patent reform that applies to everyone and addresses problems
proactively. We applaud the White
House’s recent initiatives on patent assertion entities because they
acknowledge structural problems in the patent system. We also agree with those
who are troubled by the explosion of patent cases and exclusion orders at the
ITC.
“Adjudication
by USTR fiat, however, is unacceptable and invites other countries to do the
same. While Ambassador Froman’s
letter cites policy issues, it offers it offers
little helpful analysis or
guidance. And it ignores the ITC’s
determination that Apple failed to prove either that Samsung's patent was
a standard-essential patent or that Samsung breached its obligation to a
standards-setting organization.
“We hope that the presidential ‘disapproval’
in this case signals that the Administration will view all patent-related
exclusion orders from the ITC skeptically. Otherwise, simply citing
public policy as a justification for this particular decision will ring hollow
in the ears of the world.”
