• Home
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
  • Advertise
    • Advertise On IP Watch
    • Editorial Calendar
  • Videos
  • Links
  • Help

Intellectual Property Watch

Original news and analysis on international IP policy

  • Copyright
  • Patents
  • Trademarks
  • Opinions
  • People News
  • Venues
    • Bilateral/Regional Negotiations
    • ITU/ICANN
    • United Nations – other
    • WHO
    • WIPO
    • WTO/TRIPS
    • Africa
    • Asia/Pacific
    • Europe
    • Latin America/Caribbean
    • North America
  • Themes
    • Access to Knowledge/ Open Innovation & Science
    • Food Security/ Agriculture/ Genetic Resources
    • Finance
    • Health & IP
    • Human Rights
    • Internet Governance/ Digital Economy/ Cyberspace
    • Lobbying
    • Technical Cooperation/ Technology Transfer
  • Health Policy Watch

Infojustice: The Topsy-Turvy US International Trade Commission

17/06/2013 by Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Infojustice.org examines the evolving responsibilities of the US International Trade Commission (ITC) and its decision to bar imports of older Apple iPhones and iPads, finding that they infringed patents held by Samsung.

Infojustice reports:

“The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), a once-sleepy tribunal that, until recently, devoted its time to stopping imports of counterfeit handbags and pirated DVDs, has gone rogue.  The purpose of the ITC, originally chartered by Congress in 1916, is “to adjudicate trade disputes between U.S. industries and those who seek to import goods from abroad.”

But recently matters coming before the ITC have expanded, primarily in the area of patents.  In a 2011 paper, Professor Colleen Chien reports that the number of patent suits at the ITC has increased fivefold over the past 15 years, and the number has only increased since then.

Unlike trademark and copyright disputes, many of the patent disputes brought before the ITC are between domestic companies that simply have their products manufactured overseas.  So long as a product is manufactured abroad, the ITC has the authority to block its import into the U.S.  Thus the ITC, which was created to adjudicate international trade disputes, is hearing an increasing number of cases between U.S. companies.  But that’s not all.  In order to bring a suit at the ITC, a company need only show that it has a “domestic industry” to protect, a test that, these days, is not hard to satisfy.  For example, patent trolls that do no more than license patents for a fee have been found to be engaged in a domestic industry (patent licensing).  And foreign companies that sell products in the U.S. are also engaged in a domestic industry.  Thus Samsung, Korea’s largest industrial concern and one of the largest vendors of smart phones and tablets in the U.S., can seek to block infringing imports through the ITC.  Even if those “imports” are made by a U.S. company like Apple.”

Read the full article here.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Related

Creative Commons License"Infojustice: The Topsy-Turvy US International Trade Commission" by Intellectual Property Watch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Filed Under: IP-Watch Briefs, IP Policies, Language, Themes, Venues, Enforcement, English, IP Law, Information and Communications Technology/ Broadcasting, North America, Patents/Designs/Trade Secrets, Trademarks/Geographical Indications/Domains

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Vimeo
My Tweets

IPW News Briefs

Saudis Seek Alternative Energy Partners Through WIPO Green Program

Chinese IP Officials Complete Study Of UK, European IP Law

Perspectives on the US

In US, No Remedies For Growing IP Infringements

US IP Law – Big Developments On The Horizon In 2019

More perspectives on the US...

Supported Series: Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities

Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities Series – Translations Now Available

The Myth Of IP Incentives For All Nations – Q&A With Carlos Correa

Read the TRIPS flexibilities series...

Paid Content

Interview With Peter Vanderheyden, CEO Of Article One Partners

More paid content...

IP Delegates in Geneva

  • IP Delegates in Geneva
  • Guide to Geneva-based Public Health and IP Organisations

All Story Categories

Other Languages

  • Français
  • Español
  • 中文
  • اللغة العربية

Archives

  • Archives
  • Monthly Reporter

Staff Access

  • Writers

Sign up for free news alerts

This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 · Global Policy Reporting

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.