|
Authored by: kg on Saturday, December 01 2012 @ 02:12 AM EST |
As far as EU courts are concerned, US decisions are not
binding, unlike certain decisions made in EU courts that
apply across the entire EU (e.g., the recent UK Apple vs.
Samsung case). I really don't understand how Judge Rambo
thinks he can get away with a worldwide ban on injunctions.
That obviously puts American companies at a significant
disadvantage compared to their foreign counterparts.
Several cases I would think might be somewhat comparable
would be when Walmart fell afoul of the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act, or Standard Chartered Bank fell afoul of US
laws regarding transactions with Iran. Both are something
that I don't really understand, but seem to be the price of
doing business with the US.
If current trends continue, it looks like the US will drop
to 14% of the world GDP by 2021, down from nearly 32% in
2001 (source: World Bank). At that point, corporations will
need to ask themselves whether dealing with worldwide
enforcement of US laws by the US courts is worth the cost.
---
IANAL
Linguist and Open Source Developer[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, December 01 2012 @ 08:26 AM EST |
The judge's reasoning, although I don't agree with him, is that Motorola's
promises to the IEEE and ITU to offer "worldwide licenses" to these
patents on a FRAND basis constitute a contract, and that he has the authority to
enforce that contract between the two parties in this suit. He is not creating a
"worldwide ban", he is banning Motorola from violating the terms of
the contract. The terms of the contract just happen to include a promise to
offer a "worldwide license", so if Motorola were to seek an injunction
in any other country against Microsoft for those same patents they would be
violating the terms of that contract, which the judge deems enforceable in the
US..[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, December 01 2012 @ 09:32 AM EST |
I'd really like to know what law gives this judge (clearly biased towards the
home team and giving Moto plent of grounds for appeals from here to kingdom
come) the right to make these sort of rulings that apply worldwide?
Very simple it is two US corporations, both subject to US law world wide,
playing copy wright games.
It would be a different game if one of the companies was not a US company and
not subject to US law except for what actions take place in the US.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, December 01 2012 @ 01:12 PM EST |
US contract law. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|