Obama wins, but can he move the economy from triage to rehab?

Written By Bejata Todd on Sunday, November 11, 2012 | 7:06 AM

Obama: 'The best is yet to come'
Editor's note: Watch Quest Means Business on CNN International, 1800pm GMT weekdays. Quest Means Business is presented by CNN's foremost international business correspondent Richard Quest. Follow him on Twitter.

(CNN) -- The people have spoken and President Barack Obama has another four years in office. When it comes to the economy we know what the president wants to do in his second term.

Obama's measures are incremental and nuanced, with the exception of the most talked about, which is raising taxes on higher income earners. This will be done by not renewing the Bush-era tax cuts for those at the top, and by a so-called Buffet-rule, an overarching principle that would set a minimum rate of tax payable by those earning more than a million dollars a year, and prevent them from going below that using deductions.

The tax cuts for the middle class under the Bush-era would be made permanent. Thereafter it is a real hodge podge of tax incentives, advantages, allowances and policies designed to stimulate business and bring jobs back to America.

None of them are eye catching. It is hard to get excited about the Manufacturing Communities Tax Credit or the American Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit, however important they may be.
Obama has also talked of taking a more muscular approach to China when it comes to trade. Having been goaded by Mitt Romney on the campaign trail, the U.S. has indicated that the next four years will have to see China playing on a level playing field. Unfortunately saying and doing are two different things.

The president spent much of his first term just putting out the fires. As The Economist put it in its endorsement, he "dragged America's economy back from the brink of disaster." It could have been a great deal worse. But his supporters say he hasn't had a true chance to effect real change and that will be up for grabs. If, as seems possible, the U.S. economy does continue to grow at around 2% to 3% over the next few years -- not fast enough for a massive reduction in unemployment or new spending -- he might be able to at least advance his non-crisis management policies.

But hang on. I am getting ahead of myself. Before any of this comes to fruition the single most important task the president faces: Stopping the country going over the fiscal cliff.

The cliff comes about because of a rare confluence of events. The expiration of tax cuts, the implementation of mandatory spending cuts, the limitation of certain benefits and so on. If it all happened at once, come January next year, it's estimated it could take a toll of 4% of U.S. GDP. This would comfortably push the economy into recession.

Congress and the president have to find a way to pull back from the cliff. And that will be job number one over the next few months of the lame duck congress and into the new year. Even the threat of the cliff is having a depressing effect on business decisions. If they dilly and dally about sorting it out then the damage that could be caused between now and inauguration could easily outdo any benefit the president may make in the early years of his second term.

There is one other economic issue where the president can't do very much. And that is the European sovereign debt crisis. Bully. Cajole. Berate. Treasury secretary Tim Geithner has tried them all.

Fundamentally the U.S. has to sit on the sidelines, watch, wait and pray the Europeans get their act together.

It looks like there will also have to be a new economic team. It is widely expected (although not confirmed) that Geithner won't stay much longer at Treasury. He has done four years and it's believed he wants to move back to New York. If he goes then one of the most important joists in the Obama economic team has gone.

The chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke -- who has just launched QE3 -- will be there longer.

His term doesn't expire until 2014, about a year into Obama's second term. (It's an ultimate irony that Bernanke will be gone -- if not reappointed -- before the 2015 date that the Federal Open Market Committee currently has as its target for keeping interest rates at exceptionally low levels).

What we have seen over the past 12 months in the U.S. economy is likely to be the story of the next 12 months. Incremental, slow improvements as both consumers continue to pay down debt, and repair their household finances. The posh word for this is deleveraging. Business may have lots of cash but with so much uncertainty and worry they are not about to spend it. Hoarding money will continue until there is tangible solid evidence that growth is sustainable (we are seeing some signs -- consumer confidence, house prices, housing starts, durable numbers etc -- but it is still tentative).

The banks have slowly rebuilt their capital base and if the economy continues this gradual progression then we can expect lending to begin....but again....it's expected to be slow.

In that case, unemployment will continue its very gradual decrease. With economic growth around 2% to 3% for the next few years, jobs will be created at a much slower rate than needed to make a serious dent in the overall level of joblessness. Even the Fed doesn't see things getting much better anytime soon on the jobs front.

I have said it before. Today's economies (especially the U.S.) are like a patient who has suffered cancer, leukemia and a brain tumor all at the same time. Surgery has removed much of the damage. Chemotherapy continues to be administered. The patient is going to take time to recover. For Obama, the goal will be to have policies that move from triage to rehabilitation and finally to better times.

Perhaps the big unknown for this president is exactly how he will start the long, painful and politically devastating business of cutting the deficit. Having had pretty much universal agreement from the IMF, World Bank, OECD and others that now was not the time for retrenchment, we are coming to that time when addressing the U.S. budget deficit will be a priority. The second term starts that process. Unfortunately, as we saw during the budget summit last year, that may be almost impossible. There's also the matter of seeing the exact nature of the Congress too.

The U.S. lost its coveted AAA rating under Obama. This was the unthinkable, and it happened. In term two he would be wise to get ahead of this deficit curve.

We know what the president says he wants to do. We know the policies he hopes to introduce. Now he just has to do it.
7:06 AM | 0 comments | Read More

Oracle’s Expert Says Android Ripped Off Java Patents

Written By Bejata Todd on Thursday, May 10, 2012 | 5:55 PM

By   May 9, 2012 | 7:11 pm

Google’s Android operating system infringes on two patents owned by Oracle, according to Stanford professor John Mitchell, an expert witness hired by Oracle in the ongoing court battle over Android and its use of the Java programming language.

With its case, Oracle claims that Android steps on two Java-related patents — U.S. Patents 6,061,520 and RE38,104 — and, yes, Mitchell agrees. The Stanford academic took the stand on Wednesday during the patent phase of the trial that pits Oracle against Google, and he was paid by Oracle.

During the trial — which is now into its fourth week — Judge William Alsup has chided both Google and Oracle for calling paid witnesses who seem predisposed to completely agree with their arguments.

Oracle sued Google in August of 2010, claiming that the search giant violated both its copyrights and its patents in building a new version of the Java platform for Android. Rather than license the Java platform from Sun, Google created its own virtual machine — known as Dalvik — for running applications written with the Java programming language.

On Monday, the jury decided that Google infringed on Oracle copyrights covering the overall structure, sequence, and organization of 37 of Java’s application program interfaces (APIs) — software that lets Java programs talk to the Java platform on PCs, smartphones, and other devices. But it was unable to agree on whether Google’s use of the copyrighted material constituted fair use under the law. Google immediately moved for a retrial, arguing that you can’t decide on infringement without deciding on fair use, but Judge William Alsup has yet to address this.

In the meantime, the trial has proceeded into its second phase, which addresses Oracle claims that Google also violated its patents.

U.S. Patent RE38,104 — aka ’104 — describes a “method and apparatus for resolving data references in generated code.” Basically, it covers a way of improving the software compilation — i.e., the process of translating programming code into an executable application. It uses “symbolic references” to identify data during compilation rather than numeric memory locations. Google argues that Dalvik does not use symbolic references, whereas Oracle says otherwise.

The second patent –’520 patent — describes a “method and system for performing static initialization,” a way of consolidating classes of files so that virtual machines execute less code than they otherwise would.

Oracle claims that Google uses “simulated execution” with Dalvik, whereas Google says it merely parses files.

Taking the stand on Wednesday, John Mitchell spent the better part of the afternoon taking questions from
Oracle’s lead counsel Mike Jacobs and walking the jury through extensive diagrams and software code in an effort to show that Google has indeed infringed on these two patents. Mitchell also discussed a number of tests he ran on the Android code prior to the trial, saying that these prove infringement.

Although Mitchell is paid by Oracle, the jury has been instructed to view his testimony as fact. Google will cross-examine Mitchell on Thursday, and after Oracle rests its case, it will have the chance to call its own paid expert witness.

To prove infringement, Oracle must show that Google was “willfully blind” of Sun’s patents when it developed the Dalvik virtual machine. Earlier on Wednesday, Andy Rubin, who oversees the Android project, took the stand, and Jacobs asked if he was aware of Sun’s Java patent portfolio. “As an engineer, you shouldn’t study someone else’s invention when you’re trying to come up with your own,” Rubin said.

Jonathan Schwartz, Sun’s former CEO, testified during the copyright phase of the trial, but Oracle has asked that the judge prevent him from taking the stand during the patent phase. With his previous testimony, he said that although Sun didn’t like that Google had built Android, he — as CEO — did not believe Sun should take legal action against the search giant.

On Wednesday, in an attempt to challenge Schwartz’s testimony, Oracle called Jonathan Sutphin, a former Sun executive who reported to Schwartz. Oracle lawyer Mike Jacobs asked him whether Sun ever made a definitive decision not to sue Google. “Not that I’m aware of,” Sutphin answered.

Google’s Robert Van Nest countered by showing that Schwartz was the ultimate decision maker at Sun, not Sutphin. “Other than the board, he was the highest-ranking official at the company?”
“Yes,” Sutphin answered.

While at Sun, Schwartz published a blog post espousing his support for the new platform. Oracle has pointed out that this is just a blog post, not a legal or official document. But in questioning Sutphin, Google’s Van Nest pointed out that typically, public companies must notify the SEC of public statements from their CEOs and that Sun had done so with Schwartz’s post. The implication was that the blog post was official.

5:55 PM | 0 comments | Read More

Google Seeks New Trial In Oracle Fight

Google says incomplete verdict returned on Monday violates its constitutional trial rights.


Oracle v. Google: Tour The Evidence
Google on Tuesday filed a motion asking the judge hearing Oracle's copyright and patent lawsuit against Google to declare a mistrial. Google's legal team on Monday indicated it would seek a new trial when the jury returned an incomplete verdict. The jury found that Google had infringed on some of Oracle's copyrighted Java APIs, though not to the extent that Oracle had hoped. But the jurors were unable to agree on whether Google's use of Java in its Android operating system was permissible fair use.

"Although the jury concluded that Oracle had proven that Google infringed the overall structure, sequence and organization of the copyrighted works, the jury did not reach a unanimous verdict as to whether Google had proven the affirmative defense of fair use," Google's filing says. "Under settled Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit law, the jury’s failure to reach a verdict concerning both halves of this indivisible question requires a new trial concerning both questions."

Google argues that accepting the finding of infringement and retrying only the issue of fair use violates its Seventh Amendment trial rights.
 
Oracle in its response acknowledges that a retrial would be costly and time-consuming and proposes that the court rule on whether Google's actions qualify as fair use. It also reiterated its claim for a share of Android's profits in addition to other damages, if fair use is not found.
 
The judge hearing the case, William Alsup, said on Monday that Oracle's claim for "infringer's profits" was "bordering on the ridiculous."
 
Google also filed a motion opposing Oracle's claim that the court should disallow Google's effort to challenge Oracle's ownership of the copyrights at issue. Google insists the issue of ownership is not settled because Oracle has not demonstrated that it owns a copyright to Java as a collective work--the evidence introduced so far at trial indicates that Java is registered as a single work. Google's filing says Oracle's claim "is as if Tolstoy argued that his copyright rights in War & Peace were violated by copying a dozen sentences from the novel because those sentences were individual works."
While the two sides await rulings on their motions, the trial continued on Wednesday, with Oracle trying to prove its Java patents were infringed.
 
Google's desire for a new trial might serve to encourage Judge Alsup to rule on the copyrightability of Oracle's Java APIs, widely seen as the critical issue in the case. Judges generally prefer not to rule on issues unnecessarily, and had the jury excused Google's actions as fair use or found no infringement, Judge Alsup would not need to decide whether APIs qualify for copyright protection.
 
Oracle's claim that its Java APIs qualify for copyright protection has prompted widespread concern in the technical community. If Oracle prevails, many fear that software development will become expensive or impermissible in certain circumstances due to licensing demands from owners of copyrighted code.
 
"Treating APIs as copyrightable would have a profound negative impact on interoperability, and, therefore, innovation," wrote EFF Attorney Julie Samuels in a post on Monday. "APIs are ubiquitous and fundamental to all kinds of program development. It is safe to say that all software developers use APIs to make their software work with other software."
 
Michael Risch, associate professor of law at Villanova University, believes that the court will rule APIs cannot be copyrighted to the extent that Oracle claims. Based on what he has read of the court proceedings, Risch on Wednesday wrote, "I think that the court will have no choice but to hold that the collection of API names is uncopyrightable--at least at this level of abstraction and claimed infringement."
Last week, the Court of Justice of the European Union said as much when it found that neither the functionality of a computer program nor the format of its data files qualify for copyright protection. The judge has asked Oracle and Google to offer opinions on the foreign court's ruling as it pertains to Oracle's claim.

InformationWeek is conducting a survey to get a baseline look at where enterprises stand on their IPv6 deployments, with a focus on problem areas, including security, training, budget, and readiness. Upon completion of our survey, you will be eligible to enter a drawing to receive an 16-GB Apple iPad. Take our InformationWeek IPv6 Survey now. Survey ends May 11.
5:38 PM | 0 comments | Read More

Apple, supplier Foxconn to share costs on improving factories

SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Apple Inc and its key supplier Foxconn Technology Group will share the initial costs of improving labor conditions at the Chinese factories that assemble iPhones and iPads, Foxconn's top executive said on Thursday.

Foxconn chief Terry Gou did not give a figure for the costs, but the group has been spending heavily to fight a perception its vast plants in China are sweatshops with poor conditions for its million-strong labor force. It regards the criticism as unfair.

"We've discovered that this (improving factory conditions) is not a cost. It is a competitive strength," Gou told reporters on Thursday after the ground-breaking ceremony for a new China headquarters in Shanghai.

"I believe Apple sees this as a competitive strength along with us, and so we will split the initial costs."
It was unclear if the split would be 50/50 or in some other ratio.

Foxconn announced in mid-February it had raised wages for workers by 16 to 25 percent, and in late March it reached an agreement with Apple to hire tens of thousands of new workers to reduce overtime work.

Analysts have attributed weaker-than-expected first-quarter results at Foxconn's flagship listed unit Hon Hai Precision Industry Co Ltd mainly to rising salary costs.

Hon Hai has been trying to cut rising Chinese labor costs in the past two or three years, and has been relocating plants to areas of China where wages are lower.

FOCUS ON DOMESTIC CONSUMERS

Foxconn's manufacturing in China will focus on domestic consumers in the country of 1.3 billion people, as well as research and development in technology, sales and services, Gou said.

Foxconn Technology Group's other listed units include Foxconn International Holdings, the world's top contract mobile phone maker, and Foxconn Technology Co which makes casings.

Over the past two years, there has been a spate of suicides at Foxconn's sprawling plants which make the Apple products as well as gadgets for the likes of Microsoft and Nintendo.

Apple and Foxconn agreed earlier this year to improve conditions for workers assembling Apple products.
Despite Hon Hai's weak first-quarter showing, Gou said he expected the group to be able to reach its revenue growth target of 10 percent this year.

(Additional reporting by David Lin; Editing by Muralikumar Anantharaman)
(c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2012. Check for restrictions at: http://about.reuters.com/fulllegal.asp

5:21 PM | 0 comments | Read More