Apple is now barred from importing and selling iPhone 12 and 13 in Colombia
- ?
- Anonymous
- rN7
- 11 Jul 2022
Anonymous, 11 Jul 2022Yeah but that wasn’t one.You're right. It's a sad reality and anyone upset by it needs to drop the eccentric fan love.
- ?
- Anonymous
- 6wN
- 11 Jul 2022
Tungtran, 11 Jul 2022Good luck buying your Chinese fave brand's high-end-is... moreYou can easily go for Samsung.
- K
- Kriegsherr
- 043
- 11 Jul 2022
L.O.R.D, 11 Jul 2022So, the back panel replacement can cost $600, which is some... moreYeah. Apple is as greedy as it can get.
- ?
- Anonymous
- fCC
- 11 Jul 2022
They overcharge way too much for everything but call others "unreasonable" Very unethical company Apple. Ericsson should be paid fair amount for their patents
I guess apple doesn't like the taste of their own medicine when others give it to them
- G
- Grey Wolf
- ppq
- 11 Jul 2022
Lol, "poor" Apple thinks Ericsson is overcharging them.
You don't get to be a trillion dollar company by doing nice honest things. Apple is the most greedy company from all.
Serves them right.
- L.O.R.D
- fCC
- 11 Jul 2022
So, the back panel replacement can cost $600, which is somehow okay but if Ericsson wants $15 per phone for their valuable patents, then Apple finds it too much and unreasonable
- ?
- Anonymous
- 3SI
- 11 Jul 2022
NeonHD, 11 Jul 2022Ever heard of something called a joke?Yeah but that wasn’t one.
- b
- blue
- 0CN
- 11 Jul 2022
NeonHD, 11 Jul 2022Ever heard of something called a joke?Many times, but if this was a joke, it was not funny at all.
Maybe some people should not try to make jokes.
- Z
- Z
- spY
- 11 Jul 2022
Kev, 11 Jul 2022Well, this is like Apple is following Huawei's ill-fat... moreWho is to say people NEED iphones? Lmao. Phones are not like water or food, phones are a commodity we are very accustomed to. And iphones are just like Huawei because they have a company backing them. And like Huawei, that company, Apple, is from a country accused of dubious espionage activities.
- K
- Kev
- 0Za
- 11 Jul 2022
Well, this is like Apple is following Huawei's ill-fated path and ultimately drowning. However, there's no way Apple's gonna die as Huawei did purely because of how essential an iPhone is to people. Huawei earned the hearts of enthusiasts with their innovation, but Apple's got everyone scrambling for iPhones due to their ease of use.
God forbid, I can imagine tech-savvy people importing iPhones to sell to their families and communities, because of how desperate people are for a phone that's easy to use and won't cause them headaches. Forcing iOS users to switch over to Android purely because of this will be impossible. Apple's got their customers by the balls.
In summary, certain people NEED iPhones. So, I bet that the iPhone market in Colombia will simply become unofficial. And because this is a legal battle about patents, there's nothing the Colombian government can do to stop it.
- you have to suffer
- wrg
- 11 Jul 2022
NeonHD, 11 Jul 2022Ever heard of something called a joke?overrated and outdated joke
- K
- Kifflom
- L1m
- 11 Jul 2022
Perhaps it's OK to be barred.
- I
- Invo
- S3c
- 11 Jul 2022
Good news. Apple has been strong-arming companies for years, refusing to pay patents because they know they can get away with it.
I find this bit particularly funny, "... but it believes that Ericsson is overcharging for them." as if Apple, a company that sells smart-watches for $900, thinks that they are somehow merited to complain about too high fees.
The Apple Hypocrisy is over the top.
- D
- AnonD-731363
- SH3
- 11 Jul 2022
Read both its very interesting.
Really hope Erricson wins.
Apple as always do everything to earn more money even if they have to backstab for no reason.
And for the other part here is full text:
Apple applied double standards in its attempt to prevent Colombian iPhone ban over 5G standard-essential patent.
Yesterday (Saturday) I immediately reported on filing by Apple (with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas) from which I learned that Ericsson had won a preliminary injunction in Colombia against 5G iPhones and iPads over a standard-essential patent (SEP), which is apparently being enforced now. I have now taken a second look at an English translation of a Colombian court order that Apple provided to the Texas-based court.
I find three contradictions remarkable:
In one or more of its filings with a court in the Colombian capital of Bogotá, and in Friday's filing with the U.S. court, Apple criticized Ericsson's tactic of filing multiple Colombian patent infringement actions with different courts (one action per patent). A sworn declaration by Apple's Colombian counsel (Brigard Castro's Juan Pablo Cadena Sarmiento) describes this as "an improper attempt of forum shopping until [Ericsson] obtains a favorable decision allowing Ericsson to exclude Apple from the Colombian market."
Apple does not explain why splitting up an enforcement campaign into multiple cases over one patent each is "improper." In Germany it's even the law: the only way that a German court will hear more than one patent in a given case is if they're from the same patent family.
Apple itself actually went further than what it is now criticizing Ericsson for. In 2012, Apple failed with a motion for a preliminary injunction against two Samsung products in Munich, where the court doubted the validity of the patent-in-suit. Apple then withdrew its Munich case and reasserted the very same patent shortly thereafter in Mannheim, hoping for a more favorable outcome there. It didn't work, but Apple tried.
Ericsson sought and obtained in Colombia an ex parte preliminary injunction, meaning that it requested the court to grant it without hearing the other party (though the defendant can then move for reconsideration, whic his what Apple did, even if unsuccessfully so). Apple then told the court that Ericsson had violated its right to due process and access to justice.
But as Ericsson's counsel in the Colombian Apple cases, Olarte Moure's Carlos R. Olarte, noted, "the same Apple representative has requested and obtained ex parte preliminary injunctions before the Delegation of Jurisdictional Affairs of the SIC [Dept. of Industry and Commerce], which is why it is not understood why it states forcefully on this occasion that ERICSSON's action is unfair, when it itself has implemented these legal mechanisms in defense of their clients."
Apple's motion for emergency relief in Texas (in the form of an antisuit damages order that Apple hopes will deter Ericsson from continuing to enforce the Colombian injunction) accuses Ericsson of "incessant attempts to subvert the [Texas-based] Court’s jurisdiction."
Actually, a few years ago Apple closed two stores in the Eastern District of Texas to "subvert"--I'd rather say "avoid"--that court's jurisdiction.
Figuratively speaking, Apple is now prepared to kiss Judge Gilstrap's ring just to get help from him against a foreign jurisdiction's patent infringement ruling.
It's also difficult to understand what Apple means by "irreparable harm." The English translation of that court order indicates that Apple pointed to "the net sales of Ishop, one of the distributors of Apple Colombia within the Colombian territory": US$2.6 million in 2017.
I don't expect Apple's motion for an antisuit damages order to succeed, but the fact that Apple did this may have the effect that future anti-antisuit injunctions in Germany and other jurisdictions will also bar a defendant from seeking enforcement damages abroad.
The impact of the Colombian injunction is limited. All that Apple needs to do to solve the problem is to take a license. So far Apple is spending only about 2% of its device sales on SEP royalties (less than $15 per phone). The same Apple collects 30% from those app publishers who account for the bulk of App Store revenues, and has an App Review Department that rejects thousands of submissions every day. Apple acts as a gatekeeper every day, and now there's a court in Colombia that is playing that role, too, and has ordered Apple to stop selling its 5G iPhones and iPads in Colombia, simultaneously instructing the country's customs authority to seize any shipments. For Apple, Colombia is a tiny market. For app developers, Apple's customer base of about one billion people (many of whom are among the world's richest billion people) is a huge market, but Apple denies access to that market based on partly very unreasonable--and inconsistently applied--criteria.
- T
- Tungtran
- H0s
- 11 Jul 2022
[deleted post]Good luck buying your Chinese fave brand's high-end-ish phone for $2xxx then ☺️☺️☺️
- ?
- Anonymous
- Lkg
- 11 Jul 2022
[deleted post]And why Xiaomi and BBK would be banned? Do CIA, Mi6 and other consider them security threat like huawei phone network?
Stop with this "protecting iphones sales BS".
- ?
- Anonymous
- Lkg
- 11 Jul 2022
Same old story. Apple wants to use patents that belong to other but also choose price that must be paid.
Dont wanna pay what the owner charges? Fine, do not use the tech then. Create your own.
- U
- Un Vato
- LrU
- 11 Jul 2022
Sounds like the FARC made a deal with Ericsson in Colombia
- C
- Crackling Doom
- jRn
- 11 Jul 2022
The irony of Apple believing that someone is charging too much for something.
Pot, meet kettle.